VIOLENCE 

AND    THE 

LABOR  MOVEMENT 


THE  MACMILLAN  COMPANY 

NEW  YORK   •    BOSTON   •    CHICAGO 
DALLAS   •    ATLANTA   •    SAN  FRANCISCO 

MACMILLAN  &  CO.,  Limited 

LONDON   •    BOMBAY    •    CALCUTTA 
MELBOURNE 

THE  MACMILLAN  CO.  OF  CANADA,  Ltd. 

TORONTO 


VIOLENCE 

AND  THE 

LABOR  MOVEMENT 


BY 

ROBERT  HUNTER 

AUTHOR  or  "poverty,"  "socialists  at  work,"  etc. 


THE    MACMILLAN   COMPANY 

1919 

3*405 


Copyright,  igi4 
By  THE  MACMIIXAN  COMPANY 


£>et  up  and  electrotyped.    Fublished    March,    1914. 
Reprinted  July,  1914. 


THIS   VOLUME   IS   AFFECTIONATELY   DEDICATED 
BY  THE   AUTHOR   TO 

EUGENE   V.  DEBS 

"ONE   WHO   NEVER   TURNED   HIS    BACK    BUT 
MARCHED   BREAST   FORWARD, 
NEVER   DOUBTED   CLOUDS   WOULD   BREAK," 

AND 

D.  DOUGLAS  WILSON 

WHO,  THOUGH   PARALYZED   AND   BLIND,  HAS    SO   LONG   AND 
FAITHFULLY    BLAZED   THE   TRAIL   FOR    LABOR 


PREFACE 


This  volume  is  the  result  of  some  studies  that  I  felt 
^  impelled  to  make  when,  about  three  years  ago,  certain 
*7  sections  of  the  labor  movement  in  the  United  States  were 
~  discussing  vehemently  political  action  versus  direct  ac- 
^  tion.     A  number  of  causes  combined  to  produce  a  seri- 
v   ons  and  critical  controversy.    The  Industrial  Workers  of 
^  the  World  were  carrying  on  a  lively  agitation  that  later 
^"  culminated  in  a  series  of  spectacular  strikes.    With  ideas 
^.  and  methods  that  were  not  only  in  opposition  to  those  of 
s  the  trade  unions,  but  also  to  those  of  the  socialist  party, 
£  the  new  organization  sought  to  displace  the  older  organi-. 
£  nations  by  what  it  called  the  "one  Big  Union."     There 
3  were  many  in  the  older  organizations  who  firmly  believed 
•  in  industrial  unionism,  and  the  dissensions  which  arose 
were  not  so  much  over  that  question  as  over  the  an- 
tagonistic character  of  the  new  movement  and  its  ad- 
vocacy here  of  the  violent  methods  employed  by  the  revo- 
lutionary section  of  the  French  unions.    The  most  force- 
ful and  active  spokesman  of  these  methods   was   Mr. 
William  D.  Haywood,  and,  largely  as  a  result  of  his  agi- 
tation, la  grcve  generate  and  le  sabotage  became  the  sub- 
jects of  the  hour  in  labor  and  socialist  circles.     In  191  r 
Mr.  Haywood  and  Mr.  Frank  Bohn  published  a  booklet, 
entitled  Industrial  Socialism,  in  which  they  urged  that 
the  worker  should  "use  any  weapon  which  will  win  his 
fight."  *     They  declared  that,  as  "the  present  laws  of 

*P.  57- 

vii 


Vlll 


VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 


property  are  made  by  and  for  the  capitalists,  the  workers 
should  not  hesitate  to  break  them."  * 

The  advocacy  of  such  doctrines  alarmed  the  older  so- 
cialists, who  were  familiar  ■  vvith  the  many  disasters  that 
had  overtaken  the  labor  movement  in  its  earlier  days, 
and  nearly  all  of  them  assailed  the  direct  actionists.  Mr. 
Eugene  V.  Debs,  Mr.  Victor  L.  Berger,  Mr.  John  Spargo, 
Mr.  Morris  Hillquit,  and  many  others,  less  well  known, 
combated  "the  new  methods"  in  vigorous  language.  Mr. 
Hillquit  dealt  with  the  question  in  a  manner  that  imme- 
diately awakened  the  attention  of  every  active  socialist. 
Condemning  without  reserve  every  resort  to  lawbreaking 
and  violence,  and  insisting  that  both  were  "ethically  un- 
justifiable and  tactically  suicidal,"  Mr.  Hillquit  pointed  out 
that  whenever  any  group  or  section  of  the  labor  move- 
ment "has  embarked  upon  a  policy  of  'breaking  the  law' 
or  using  'any  weapons  which  will  win  the  fight,'  whether 
such  policy  was  styled  'terrorism,'  'propaganda  of  the 
deed,'  'direct  action,'  'sabotage,'  or  'anarchism,'  it  has  in- 
variably served  to  demoralize  and  destroy  the  movement, 
by  attracting  to  it  professional  criminals,  infesting  it 
with  spies,  leading  the  workers  to  needless  and  senseless 
slaughter,  and  ultimately  engendering  a  spirit  of  disgust 
and  reaction.  It  was  this  advocacy  of  'lawbreaking' 
which  Marx  and  Engels  fought  so  severely  in  the  Inter- 
national and  which  finally  led  to  the  disruption  of  the 
first  great  international  parliament  of  labor,  and  the  so- 
cialist party  of  every  country  in  the  civilized  world  has 
since  uniformly  and  emphatically  rejected  that  policy."  f 

There  could  be  no  better  introduction  to  the  present 
volume  than  these  words  of  Mr.  Hillquit,  and  it  will,  I 
think,  be  clear  to  the  reader  that  the  history  of  the  labor 

*P.  57- 

f  The  New  York  Call,  November  20,  191 1. 


PREFACE 


IX 


movement  during  the  last  half-century  fully  sustains  Mr. 
Hillquit's  position.  The  problem  of  methods  has  always 
been  a  vital  matter  to  the  labor  movement,  and,  for  a 
hundred  years  at  least,  the  quarrels  now  dividing  syndi- 
calists and  socialists  have  disturbed  that  movement.  In 
the  Chartist  days  the  "physical  forcists"  opposed  the 
"moral  forcists,"  and  later  dissensions  over  the  same 
question  occurred  between  the  Bakouninists  and  the 
Marxists.  Since  then  anarchists  and  social  demo- 
crats, direct  actionists  and  political  actionists,  syndical- 
ists and  socialists  have  continued  the  battle.  I  have  at- 
tempted here  to  present  the  arguments  made  by  both 
sides  of  this  controversy,  and,  while  no  doubt  my  bias  is 
perfectly  clear,  I  hope  I  have  presented  fairly  the  posi- 
tion of  each  of  the  contending  elements.  Fortunately, 
the  direct  actionists  have  exercised  a  determining  influence 
only  in  a  few  places,  and  everywhere,  in  the  end,  the  vic- 
tory of  those  who  were  contending  for  the  employment 
of  peaceable  means  has  been  complete.  Already  in  this 
country,  as  a  result  of  the  recent  controversy,  it  is  writ- 
ten in  the  constitution  of  the  socialist  party  that  "any 
member  of  the  party  who  opposes  political  action  or  ad- 
vocates crime,  sabotage,  or  other  methods  of  violence  as 
a  weapon  of  the  working  class  to  aid  in  its  emancipation 
shall  be  expelled  from  membership  in  the  party."  * 
Adopted  by  the  national  convention  of  the  party  in  191 1, 
this  clause  was  ratified  at  a  general  referendum  of  all  the 
membership  of  the  party.  It  is  clear,  therefore,  that  the 
immense  majority  of  socialists  are  determined  to  employ 
peaceable  and  legal  methods  of  action. 

It  is,  of  course,  perfectly  obvious  that  the  methods 
to  be  employed  in  the  struggles  between  classes,  as  be- 
tween   nations,   cannot  be  predetermined.      And,   while 

*  Article  II,  Section  6. 


x  VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

the  socialists  everywhere  have  condemned  the  use  of  vio- 
lent measures  and  are  now  exercising  every  power  at 
their  command  to  keep  the  struggle  between  labor  and 
capital  on  legal  ground,  events  alone  will  determine 
whether  the  great  social  problems  of  our  day  can  be  set- 
tled peaceably.  The  entire  matter  is  largely  in  the  hands 
of  the  ruling  classes.  And,  while  the  socialists  in  all 
countries  are  determined  not  to  allow  themselves  to  be 
provoked  into  acts  of  despair  by  temporary  and  fleeting 
methods  of  repression,  conditions  may  of  course  arise 
where  no  organization,  however  powerful,  could  prevent 
the  masses  from  breaking  into  an  open  and  bloody  con- 
flict. On  one  memorable  occasion  (March  31,  1886), 
August  Bebel  uttered  some  impressive  words  on  this 
subject  in  the  German  Reichstag.  "Herr  von  Putt- 
kamer,"  said  Bebel,  "calls  to  mind  the  speech  which  I 
delivered  in  1881  in  the  debate  on  the  Socialist  Law  a 
few  days  after  the  murder  of  the  Czar.  I  did  not  then 
glorify  regicide.  I  declared  that  a  system  like  that  pre- 
vailing in  Russia  necessarily  gave  birth  to  Nihilism  and 
must  necessarily  lead  to  deeds  of  violence.  Yes,  I  do 
not  hesitate  to  say  that  if  you  should  inaugurate  such 
a  system  in  Germany  it  would  of  necessity  lead  to 
deeds  of  violence  with  us  as  well.  (A  deputy  called 
out:  'The  German  Monarchy?')  The  German  Monar- 
chy would  then  certainly  be  affected,  and  I  do  not  hesi- 
tate to  say  that  I  should  be  one  of  the  first  to  lend  a  hand 
in  the  work,  for  all  measures  are  allowable  against  such 
a  system."  *  I  take  it  that  Bebel  was,  in  this  instance, 
simply  pointing  out  to  the  German  bureaucracy  the  in- 
evitable consequences  of  the  Russian  system.  A.t  that 
very  moment  he  was  restraining  hundreds  of  thousands 

*  Quoted  by  Dawson,  "German  Socialism  and  Ferdinand  Las- 
sane,"  p.  272. 


PREFACE  ri 

of  his  followers  from  acts  of  despair,  yet  he  could  not 
resist  warning  the  German  rulers  that  the  time  might 
come  in  that  country  when  no  considerations  whatever 
could  persuade  men  to  forego  the  use  of  the  most  violent 
retaliative  measures.  This  view  is,  of  course,  well  estab- 
lished in  our  national  history,  and  our  Declaration  of  In- 
dependence, as  well  as  many  of  our  State  constitutions, 
asserts  that  it  is  both  the  right  and  the  duty  of  the 
people  to  overthrow  by  any  means  in  their  power  an  op- 
pressive and  tyrannical  government.  This  was,  of 
course,  always  the  teaching  of  what  Marx  liked  to  call 
"the  bourgeois  democrats."  It  was,  in  fact,  their  only 
conception  of  revolution. 

The  socialist  idea  of  revolution  is  quite  a  different 
one.  Insurrection  plays  no  necessary  part  in  it,  and  no 
one  sees  more  clearly  than  the  socialist  that  nothing  could 
prove  more  disastrous  to  the  democratic  cause  than  to 
have  the  present  class  conflict  break  into  a  civil  war.  If 
such  a  war  becomes  necessary,  it  will  be  in  spite  of  the 
organized  socialists,  who,  in  every  country  of  the  world, 
not  only  seek  to  avoid,  but  actually  condemn,  riotous,  tem- 
pestuous, and  violent  measures.  Such  measures  do  not 
fit  into  their  philosophy,  which  sees,  as  the  cause  of  our 
present  intolerable  social  wrongs,  not  the  malevolence  of 
individuals  or  of  classes,  but  the  workings  of  certain 
economic  laws.  One  can  cut  off  the  head  of  an  indi- 
vidual, but  it  is  not  possible  to  ci^t  off  the  head  of  an 
economic  law.  From  the  beginning  of  the  modern  so- 
cialist movement,  this  has  been  perfectly  clear  to  the  so- 
cialist, whose  philosophy  has  taught  him  that  appeals  to 
violence  tend,  as  Engels  has  pointed  out,  to  obscure  the 
understanding  of  the  real  development  of  things. 

The  dissensions  over  the  use  of  force,  that  have  been 
so  continuous  and  passionate   in  the  labor   movement, 


XI) 


VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 


arise  from  two  diametrically  opposed  points  of  view. 
One  is  at  bottom  anarchistic,  and  looks  upon  all  social 
evils  as  the  result  of  individual  wrong-doing.  The  other 
is  at  bottom  socialistic,  and  looks  upon  all  social  evils  as 
in  the  main  the  result  of  economic  and  social  laws.  To 
those  who  believe  there  are  good  trusts  and  bad  trusts, 
good  capitalists  and  bad  capitalists,  and  that  this  is  an 
adequate  analysis  of  our  economic  ills,  there  is,  of  course, 
after  all,  nothing  left  but  hatred  of  individuals  and,  in 
the  extreme  case,  the  desire  to  remove  those  individuals. 
To  those,  on  the  other  hand,  who  see  in  certain  underly- 
ing economic  forces  the  source  of  nearly  all  of  our  dis- 
tressing social  evils,  individual  hatred  and  malice  can 
make  in  reality  no  appeal.  This  volume,  on  its  historical 
side,  as  well  as  in  its  survey  of  the  psychology  of  the 
various  elements  in  the  labor  movement,  is  a  contribu- 
tion to  the  study  of  the  reactions  that  affect  various 
minds  and  temperaments  in  the  face  of  modern  social 
wrongs.  If  one's  point  of  view  is  that  of  the  anarchist, 
he  is  led  inevitably  to  make  his  war  upon  individuals. 
The  more  sensitive  and  sincere  he  is,  the  more  bitter 
and  implacable  becomes  that  war.  If  one's  point  of  view 
is  based  on  what  is  now  called  the  economic  interpreta- 
tion of  history,  one  is  emancipated,  in  so  far  as  that  is 
possible  for  emotional  beings,  from  all  hatred  of  indi- 
viduals, and  one  sees  before  him  only  the  necessity  of 
readjusting  the  economic  basis  of  our  common  life  in 
order  to  achieve  a  more  nearly  perfect  social  order. 

In  contrasting  the  temperaments,  the  points  of  view, 
the  philosophy,  and  the  methods  of  these  two  antagonis- 
tic minds,  I  have  been  forced  to  take  two  extremes,  the 
Bakouninist  anarchist  and  the  Marxian  socialist.  In  the 
case  of  the  former,  it  has  been  necessary  to  present  the 
views  of  a  particular  school  of  anarchism,  more  or  less 


PREFACE  xiii 

regardless  of  certain  other  schools.  Proudhon,  Stirner, 
Warren,  and  Tucker  do  not  advocate  violent  measures, 
and  Tolstoi,  Ibsen,  Spencer,  Thoreau,  and  Emerson — 
although  having  the  anarchist  point  of  view — can  hardly 
oe  conceived  of  as  advocating  violent  measures.  It  will 
be  obvious  to  the  reader  that  I  have  not  dealt  with  the 
philosophical  anarchism,  or  whatever  one  may  call  it, 
of  these  last.  I  have  confined  myself  to  the  anarchism 
of  those  who  have  endeavored  to  carry  out  their  princi- 
ples in  the  democratic  movement  of  their  time  and  to  the 
deeds  of  those  who  threw  themselves  into  the  active  life 
about  them  and  endeavored  to  impress  both  their  ideas 
and  methods  upon  the  awakening  world  of  labor.  It  is 
the  anarchism  of  these  men  that  the  world  knows.  By 
deeds  and  not  by  words  have  they  written  their  definition 
of  anarchism,  and  I  am  taking  and  using  the  term  in  this 
volume  in  the  sense  in  which  it  is  used  most  commonly 
by  people  in  general.  If  this  offends  the  anarchists  of  the 
non-resistant  or  passive-resistant  type,  it  cannot  be 
helped.  It  is  the  meaning  that  the  most  active  of  the 
anarchists  have  themselves  given  it. 

I  have  sought  to  take  my  statements  from  first-hand 
sources  only,  although  in  a  few  cases  I  have  had  to  de- 
pend on  secondary  sources.  I  am  deeply  indebted  to  Mr. 
Herman  Schlueter,  editor  of  the  New  Yorker  Volkszei- 
tung,  for  lending  me  certain  rare  books  and  pamphlets, 
and  also  for  reading  carefully  and  critically  the  entire 
manuscript.  With  his  help  I  have  managed  to  get  every 
document  that  has  seemed  to  me  essential.  At  the  end 
of  the  volume  will  be  found  a  complete  list  of  the  au- 
thorities which  I  have  consulted.  I  have  to  regret  that  I 
could  not  read,  before  sending  this  manuscript  to  the 
publisher,  the  four  volumes  just  published  of  the  corre- 
spondence between  Marx  and  Engels  (Der  Brief ivechsel 


XIV 


VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 


swischen  Friedrich  Engels  und  Karl  Marx  1844  bis  1883, 
herausgegeben  von  A.  Bebel  und  Ed.  Bernstein,  J.  H.  W. 
Dietz,  Stuttgart,  1913).  I  must  also  express  here  my 
gratitude  to  Mr.  Morris  Hillquit  and  to  Miss  Helen 
Phelps  Stokes  for  making  many  valuable  suggestions,  as 
well  as  my  indebtedness  to  Miss  Helen  Bernice  Sweeney 
and  Mr.  Sidney  S.  Bobbe  for  their  most  capable  secre- 
tarial assistance.  Special  appreciation  is  due  my  wife  for 
her  helpfulness  and  painstaking  care  at  many  difficult 
stages  of  the  work. 

Highland   Farm, 

Noroton  Heights, 
Connecticut. 
November   1,    1913. 


CONTENTS 

Preface vu 

PART  I 
TERRORISM    IN    WESTERN    EUROPE 

CHAPTER  PAGE 

I.    The    Father    of    Terrorism 3 

II.    A  Series  of  Insurrections 28 

III.  The  Propaganda  of  the  Deed 49 

IV.  Johann  Most  in  America 62 

V.    A   Series  of  Tragedies 77 

VI.    Seeking  the  Causes 9° 

PART  II 
STRUGGLES    WITH    VIOLENCE 

VII.    The  Birth  of  Modern  Socialism  ....  125 

VIII.    The  Battle  Between  Marx  and  Bakounin   .  154 

IX.    The  Fight  for  Existence 194 

X.    The  Newest  Anarchism 229 

XI.    The  Oldest   Anarchism 276 

XII.    Visions  of  Victory 3^7 

Authorities 357 

Index        .       .  .    .      .      .      ...»•••      ♦      •  375 


PART   I 
TERRORISM   IN  WESTERN  EUROPE 


MICHAEL    BAKOUXIN 


Violence  and  the  Labor 
Movement 

CHAPTER   I 

THE  FATHER  OF  TERRORISM 

"Dante  tells  us,"  writes  Macaulay,  "that  he  saw,  in 
Malebolge,  a  strange  encounter  between  a  human  form 
and  a  serpent.  The  enemies,  after  cruel  wounds  inflicted, 
stood  for  a  time  glaring  on  each  other.  A  great  cloud 
surrounded  them,  and  then  a  wonderful  metamorphosis 
began.  Each  creature  was  transfigured  into  the  likeness 
of  its  antagonist.  The  serpent's  tail  divided  into  two 
legs ;  the  man's  legs  intertwined  themselves  into  a  tail. 
The  body  of  the  serpent  put  forth  arms ;  the  arms  of  the 
man  shrank  into  his  body.  At  length  the  serpent  stood 
up  a  man,  and  spake ;  the  man  sank  down  a  serpent,  and 
glided  hissing  away."  (i)  Something,  I  suppose,  not  un- 
like this  appalling  picture  of  Dante's  occurs  in  the  world 
whenever  a  man's  soul  becomes  saturated  with  hatred. 
It  will  be  remembered,  for  instance,  that  even  Shelley's 
all-forgiving  and  sublime  Prometheus  was  forced  by  the 
torture  of  the  furies  to  cry  out  in  anguish, 

"Whilst  I  behold  such  execrable  shapes, 
Methinks  I  grow  like  what  I  contemplate." 

It  would  not  be  strange,  then,  if  here  and  there  a  man's 
entire  nature  were  transfigured  when  he  sees  a  monster 

3 


4  VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

appear,  cruel,  pitiless,  and  unyielding,  crushing  to  the 
earth  the  weak,  the  weary,  and  the  heavy-laden.  Nor  is 
it  strange  that  in  Russia — the  blackest  Malebolge  in  the 
modern  world — a  litter  of  avengers  is  born  every  genera- 
tion of  the  savage  brutality,  the  murderous  oppression, 
the  satanic  infamy  of  the  Russian  government.  And 
who  does  not  love  those  innumerable  Russian  youths  and 
maidens,  driven  to  acts  of  defiance — hopeless,  futile,  yet 
necessary — if  for  no  other  reason  than  to  fulfill  their 
duty  to  humanity  and  thus  perhaps  quiet  a  quivering  con- 
science? There  is  something  truly  Promethean  in  the 
struggle  of  the  Russian  youth  against  their  overpowering 
antagonist.  They  know  that  the  price  of  one  single  act 
of  protest  is  their  lives.  Yet,  to  the  eternal  credit  of  hu- 
manity, thousands  of  them  have  thrown  themselves  naked 
on  the  spears  of  their  enemy,  to  become  an  example  of 
sacrificial  revolt.  And  can  any  of  us  wonder  that  when 
even  this  tragic  seeding  of  the  martyrs  proved  unfruit- 
ful, many  of  the  Russian  youth,  brooding  over  the  ir- 
remediable wrongs  of  their  people,  were  driven  to  in- 
sanity and  suicide?  And,  if  all  that  was  possible,  would 
it  be  surprising  if  it  also  happened  that  at  least  one 
flaming  rebel  should  have  developed  a  philosophy  of  war- 
fare no  less  terrible  than  that  of  the  Russian  bureaucracy 
itself?  I  do  not  know,  nor  would  I  allow  myself  to  sug- 
gest, that  Michael  Bakounin,  who  brought  into  Western 
Europe  and  planted  there  the  seeds  of  terrorism,  came 
to  be  like  what  he  contemplated,  or  that  his  philosophy 
and  tactics  of  action  were  altogether  a  reflection  of  those 
he  opposed.  Yet,  if  that  were  the  case,  one  could  better 
understand  that  bitter  and  bewildering  character. 

That  there  is  some  justification  for  speculation  on 
these  grounds  is  indicated  by  the  heroes  of  Bakounin. 
He  always  meant  to  write  the  story  of  Prometheus,  and 


THE  FATHER  OF  TERRORISM  5 

he  never  spoke  of  Satan  without  an  admiration  that  ap- 
proached adoration.  They  were  the  two  unconquerable 
enemies  of  absolutism.  He  was  "the  eternal  rebel," 
Bakounin  once  said  of  Satan,  "the  first  free-thinker  and 
emancipator  of  the  worlds."  (2)  In  another  place  he 
speaks  of  Proudhon  as  having  the  instinct  of  a  revolu- 
tionist, because  "he  adored  Satan  and  proclaimed  anar- 
chy." (3)  In  still  another  place  he  refers  to  the  prole- 
tariat of  Paris  as  "the  modern  Satan,  the  great  rebel, 
vanquished,  but  not  pacified."  (4)  In  the  statutes  of 
his  secret  organization,  of  which  I  shall  speak  again  later, 
he  insists  that  "principles,  programs,  and  rules  are  not 
nearly  as  important  as  that  the  persons  who  put  them 
into  execution  shall  have  the  devil  in  them."  (5)  Al- 
though an  avowed  and  militant  atheist,  Bakounin  could 
not  subdue  his  worship  of  the  king  of  devils,  and,  had 
anyone  during  his  life  said  that  Bakounin  was  not  only 
a  modern  Satan  incarnate,  but  the  eight  other  devils  as 
well,  nothing  could  have  delighted  him  more.  And  no 
doubt  he  was  inspired  to  this  demon  worship  by  his  im- 
placable hatred  of  absolutism — whether  it  be  in  religion, 
which  he  considered  as  tyranny  over  the  mind,  or  in  gov- 
ernment, which  he  considered  as  tyranny  over  the  body. 
To  Bakounin  the  two  eternal  enemies  of  man  were  the 
Government  and  the  Church,  and  no  weapon  was  un- 
worthy of  use  which  promised  in  any  measure  to  assist 
in  their  entire  and  complete  obliteration. 

Absolutism  was  to  Bakounin  a  universal  destroyer  of 
the  best  and  the  noblest  qualities  in  man.  And,  as  it 
stands  as  an  effective  barrier  to  the  only  social  order  that 
can  lift  man  above  the  beast — that  of  perfect  liberty — so 
must  the  sincere  warrior  against  absolutism  become  the 
universal  destroyer  of  any  and  everything  associated 
with  tyranny.     How  far  such  a  crusade  leads  one  may 


6  VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

be  gathered  from  Bakotinin's  own  words :  "The  end 
of  revolution  can  be  no  other,"  he  declares,  "than 
the  destruction  of  all  powers — religious,  monarchi- 
cal, aristocratic,  and  bourgeois — in  Europe.  Conse- 
quently, the  destruction  of  all  now  existing  States,  with 
all  their  institutions — political,  juridical,  bureaucratic, 
and  financial."  (6)  In  another  place  he  says:  "It  will  be 
essential  to  destroy  everything,  and  especially  and  before 
all  else,  all  property  and  its  inevitable  corollary,  the 
State."  (7)  "We  want  to  destroy  all  States,"  he  re- 
peats in  still  another  place,  "and  all  Churches,  with  all 
their  institutions  and  their  laws  of  religion,  politics,  ju- 
risprudence, finance,  police,  universities,  economics,  and 
society,  in  order  that  all  these  millions  of  poor,  deceived, 
enslaved,  tormented,  exploited  human  beings,  delivered 
from  all  their  official  and  officious  directors  and  bene- 
factors, associations,  and  individuals,  can  at  last  breathe 
with  complete  freedom."  (8)  All  through  life  Bakou- 
nin  clung  tenaciously  to  this  immense  idea  of  destruc- 
tion, "terrible,  total,  inexorable,  and  universal,"  for  only 
after  such  a  period  of  destructive  terror — in  which  every 
vestige  of  "the  institutions  of  tyranny"  shall  be  swept 
from  the  earth — can  "anarchy,  that  is  to  say,  the  com- 
plete manifestation  of  unchained  popular  life,"  (9)  de- 
velop liberty,  equality,  and  justice.  These  were  the 
means,  and  this  was  the  end  that  Bakounin  had  in  mind 
all  the  days  of  his  life  from  the  time  he  convinced  him- 
self as  a  young  man  that  "the  desire  for  destruction  is 
at  the  same  time  a  creative  desire."  (10) 

Even  so  brief  a  glimpse  into  Bakounin's  mind  is  likely 
to  startle  the  reader.  But  there  is  no  fiction  here ;  he  is 
what  Carlyle  would  have  called  "a  terrible  God's  Fact." 
He  was  a  very  real  product  of  Russia's  infamy,  and  we 
need  not  be  surprised  if  one  with  Bakounin's  great  tal- 


THE  FATHER  OF  TERRORISM  7 

ents,  worshiping  Satan  and  preaching  ideas  of  destruc- 
tion that  comprehended  Cosmos  itself,  should  have  per- 
formed in  the  world  a  unique  and  never-to-be-forgotten 
role.  It  was  inevitable  that  he  should  have  stood  out 
among  the  men  of  his  time  as  a  strange,  bewildering  fig- 
ure. To  his  very  matter-of-fact  and  much  annoyed  an- 
tagonist, Karl  Marx,  he  was  little  more  than  a  buffoon, 
the  "amorphous  pan-destroyer,  who  has  succeeded  in  unit- 
ing in  one  person  Rodolphe,  Monte  Cristo,  Karl  Moor, 
and  Robert  Macaire."  (11)  On  the  other  hand,  to  his 
circle  of  worshipers  he  was  a  mental  giant,  a  flaming 
titan,  a  Russian  Siegfried,  holding  out  to  all  the  powers 
of  heaven  and  earth  a  perpetual  challenge  to  combat. 
And,  in  truth,  Bakouuin's  ideas  and  imagination  covered 
a  field  that  is  not  exhausted  by  the  range  of  mythology. 
He  juggled  with  universal  abstractions  as  an  alchemist 
with  the  elements  of  the  earth  or  an  astrologist  with  the 
celestial  spheres.  His  workshop  was  the  universe,  his 
peculiar  task  the  refashioning  of  Cosmos,  and  he  began 
by  declaring  war  upon  the  Almighty  himself  and  every 
institution  among  men  fashioned  after  what  he  consid- 
ered to  be  the  absolutism  of  the  Infinite. 

It  is,  then,  with  no  ordinary  human  being  that  we  must 
deal  in  treating  of  him  who  is  known  as  the  father  of 
terrorism.  Yet,  as  he  lived  in  this  world  and  fought 
with  his  faithful  circle  to  lay  down  the  principles  of  uni- 
versal revolution,  we  find  him  very  human  indeed.  Of 
contradictions,  for  instance,  there  seems  to  be  no  end. 
Although  an  atheist,  he  had  an  idol,  Satan.  Although  an 
eternal  enemy  of  absolutism,  he  pleaded  with  Alexander 
to  become  the  Czar  of  the  people.  And,  although  he 
fought  passionately  and  superbly  to  destroy  what  he 
called  the  "authoritarian  hierarchy"  in  the  organization 
of  the  International,  he  planned  for  his  own  purpose 


8  VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

the  most  complete  hierarchy  that  can  well  be  imagined. 
His  only  tactic,  that  of  lex  talionis,  also  worked  out  a 
perfect  reciprocity  even  in  those  common  affairs  to  which 
this  prodigy  stooped  in  order  to  conquer,  for  he  seemed 
to  create  infallibly  every  institution  he  combated  and 
to  use  every  weapon  that  he  execrated  when  employed 
by  others.  The  most  fertile  of  law-givers  himself,  he 
could  not  tolerate  another.  Pope  of  Popes  in  his  little 
inner  circle,  he  could  brook  no  rival.  Macftiavelli's 
Prince  was  no  richer  in  intrigue  than  Bakounin ;  yet  he 
always  fancied  himself,  with  the  greatest  self-compas- 
sion, as  the  naive  victim  of  the  endless  and  malicious  in- 
trigues of  others.  However  affectionate,  generous,  and 
open  he  seemed  to  be  with  those  who  followed  him  wor- 
shipfully,  even  they  were  not  trusted  with  his  secrets, 
and,  if  he  was  always  cunning  and  crafty  toward  his  ene- 
mies, he  never  had  a  friend  that  he  did  not  use  to  his 
profit.  Volatile  in  his  fitful  changes  toward  men  and 
movements,  rudderless  as  he  often  seemed  to  be  in  the 
incoherence  of  his  ideas  and  of  his  policies,  there  never- 
theless burned  in  his  soul  throughout  life  a  great  flaming, 
and  perhaps  redeeming,  hatred  of  tyranny.  At  times  he 
would  lead  his  little  bands  into  open  warfare  upon  it, 
dreaming  always  that  the  world  once  in  motion  would 
follow  him  to  the  end  in  his  great  work  of  destruction. 
At  other  times  he  would  go  to  it  bearing  gifts,  in  the 
hope,  as  we  must  charitably  think,  of  destroying  it  by 
stealth. 

In  general  outline,  this  is  the  father  of  terrorism  as  I 
see  him.  How  he  developed  his  views  is  not  entirely 
clear,  as  very  little  is  known  of  his  early  life,  and  there 
are  several  broken  threads  at  different  periods  both  early 
and  late  in  his  career.  The  little  known  of  his  youth 
may  be  quickly  told.    He  was  born  in  Russia  in  1814,  of 


THE  FATHER  OF  TERRORISM  9 

a  family  of  good  position,  belonging  to  the  old  nobility. 
He  was  well  educated  and  began  his  career  in  the  army. 
Shortly  after  the  Polish  insurrection  had  been  crushed, 
militarism  and  despotism  became  abhorrent  to  him,  and 
the  spectacle  of  that  terrorized  country  made  an  ever- 
lasting impression  upon  him.  In  1834  he  renounced  his 
military  career  and  returned  to  Moscow,  where  he  gave 
himself  up  entirely  to  the  study  of  philosophy,  and,  as 
was  natural  at  the  period,  he  saturated  himself  with 
Hegel.  From  Moscow  he  went  to  St.  Petersburg  and 
later  to  Berlin,  constantly  pursuing  his  studies,  and  in 
1842  he  published  under  the  title,  "La  reaction  en  Alle- 
magne,  fragment,  par  tin  Francais,"  an  article  ending 
with  the  now  famous  line :  "The  desire  for  destruction  is 
at  the  same  time  a  creative  desire."  (12)  This  article  ap- 
peared in  the  Deutsche  Jahrbiicher,  in  which  publication 
he  soon  became  a  collaborator.  The  authorities,  however, 
were  hostile  to  the  paper,  and  he  went  into  Switzerland 
in  1843,  only  to  be  driven  later  to  Paris.  There  he  made 
the  acquaintance  of  Proudhon,  "the  father  of  anar- 
chism," and  spent  days  and  nights  with  him  discussing 
the  problems  of  government,  of  society,  and  of  religion. 
He  also  met  Marx,  "the  father  of  socialism,"  and,  al- 
though they  were  never  sympathetic,  yet  they  came  fre- 
quently in  friendly  and  unfriendly  contact  with  each 
other.  George  Sand,  George  Herwegh,  Arnold  Ruge, 
Frederick  Engels,  William  Weitling,  Alexander  Herzen, 
Richard  Wagner,  Adolf  Reichel,  and  many  other  bril- 
liant revolutionary  spirits  of  the  time,  Bakounin  knew 
intimately,  and  for  him,  as  for  many  others,  the  period 
of  the  forties  was  one  of  great  intellectual  development. 
In  the  insurrectionary  period  that  began  in  1848  he 
became  active,  but  he  appears  to  have  done  little  note- 
worthy before  January,  1849,  when  he  went  secretly  to 


IO        VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

Leipsic  in  the  hope  of  aiding  a  group  of  young  Czechs 
to  launch  an  uprising  in  Bohemia.  Shortly  afterward 
an  insurrection  broke  out  in  Dresden,  and  he  rushed 
there  to  become  one  of  the  most  active  leaders  of  the 
revolt.  It  is  said  that  he  was  "the  veritable  soul  of  the 
revolution,"  and  that  he  advised  the  insurrectionists,  in 
order  to  prevent  the  Prussians  from  firing  upon  the  bar- 
ricades, to  place  in  front  of  them  the  masterpieces  from 
the  art  museum.  (13)  When  that  insurrection  v/as 
suppressed,  he,  Richard  Wagner,  and  some  others  hur- 
ried to  Chemnitz,  where  Bakounin  was  captured  and  con- 
demned to  death.  Austria,  however,  demanded  his  ex- 
tradition, and  there,  for  the  second  time,  he  was  con- 
demned to  be  hanged.  Eventually  he  was  handed  over 
to  Russia,  where  he  again  escaped  paying  the  death  pen- 
alty by  the  pardon  of  the  Czar,  and,  after  six  years  in 
prison,  he  was  banished  to  Siberia.  Great  efforts  were 
made  to  secure  a  pardon  for  him,  but  without  success. 
However,  through  his  influential  relatives,  he  was  al- 
lowed such  freedom  of  movement  that  in  the  end  he  suc- 
ceeded in  escaping,  and,  returning  to  Europe  through  Ja- 
pan and  America,  he  arrived  in  England  in  1861. 

The  next  year  is  notable  for  the  appearance  of  two  of 
his  brochures,  "Aux  amis  russes,  polonais,  et  a  tous  les 
amis  slaves,"  and  "La  Cause  du  Peuple,  Romanoff,  Pou- 
gatchoff,  ou  Pestel?"  One  would  have  thought  that 
twelve  years  in  prison  and  in  Siberia  would  have  made 
him  more  bitter  than  ever  against  the  State  and  the 
Czar;  but,  curiously,  these  writings  mark  a  striking  de- 
parture from  his  previous  views.  For  almost  the  only 
time  in  his  life  he  expressed  a  desire  to  see  Russia  de- 
velop into  a  magnificent  "State,"  and  he  urged  the  Rus- 
sians to  drive  the  Tartars  back  to  Asia,  the  Germans 
back  to  Germany,  and  to  become  a  free  people,  exclusively 


THE  FATHER  OF  TERRORISM  n 

Russian.     By   cooperative   effort  between   the   military 
powers  of  the  Russian  Government  and  the  insurrection- 
ary activities  of  the  Slavs  subjected  to  foreign  govern- 
ments, the  Russian  peoples  could  wage  a  war,  he  argued, 
that  would  create  a  great  united  empire.    The  second  of 
the   above-mentioned   volumes   was    addressed   particu- 
larly to  Alexander  II.     In  this  Bakounin  prophesies  that 
Russia  must  soon  undergo  a  revolution.     It  may  come 
through  terrible  and  bloody  uprisings  on  the  part  of  the 
masses,  led  by  some  fierce  and  sanguinary  popular  idol, 
or  it  will  come  through  the  Czar  himself,  if  he  should  be 
wise  enough  to  assume  in  person  the  leadership  of  the 
peasants.     He  declared  that   "Alexander  II.   could   so 
easily  become  the  popular  idol,  the  first  Czar  of  the 
peasants.     ...     By  leaning  upon  the  people  he  could 
become   the    savior    and    master    of    the    entire    Slavic 
world."    (14)      He   then   pictures   in   glowing   terms    a 
united  Russia,  in  which  the  Czar  and  the  people  will 
work  harmoniously  together  to  build  up  a  great  demo- 
cratic State.    But  he  threatens  that,  if  the  Czar  does  not 
become  the  "savior   of  the  Slavic  world,"  an  avenger 
will  arise  to  lead  an  outraged  and  avenging  people.    He 
again  declares,   "We  prefer   to   follow   Romanoff    (the 
family  name  of  the  Czar),  if  Romanoff  could  and  would 
transform   himself    from   the   Petersbourgeois   emperor 
into  the  Czar  of  the  peasants."  (15)     Despite  much  flat- 
tery and  ill-merited  praise,  the  Czar  refused  to  be  con- 
verted, and  Bakounin  rushed  off  the  next  year  to  Stock- 
holm, in  the  hope  of  organizing  a  band  of  Russians  to 
enter  Poland  to  assist   in   the   insurrection   which   had 
broken  out  there. 

The  next  few  years  were  spent  mostly  in  Italy,  and  it 
was  here  that  he  conceived  his  plan  of  a  secret  interna- 
tional organization  of  revolutionists.    Little  is  known  of 


12        VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

how  extensive  this  secret  organization  actually  became, 
but  Bakounin  said  in  1864  that  it  included  a  number  of 
Italian,  French,  Scandinavian,  and  Slavic  revolutionists. 
As  a  scheme  this  secret  organization  is  remarkable.  It 
included  three  orders :  I.  The  International  Brothers ; 
II.  The  National  Brothers;  III.  The  semi-secret,  semi- 
public  organization  of  the  International  Alliance  of  So- 
cial Democracy.  Without  Bakounin's  intending  it,  doubt- 
less, the  International  Brothers  resembled  the  circle  of 
gods  in  mythology ;  the  National  Brothers,  the  circle  of 
heroes ;  while  the  third  order  resembled  the  mortals  who 
were  to  bear  the  burden  of  the  fighting.  The  Interna- 
tional Brothers  were  not  to  exceed  one  hundred,  and 
they  were  to  be  the  guiding  spirits  of  the  great  revolu- 
tionary storms  that  Bakounin  thought  were  then  immi- 
nent in  Europe.  They  must  possess  above  all  things 
"revolutionary  passion,"  and  they  were  to  be  the  su- 
preme secret  executive  power  of  the  two  subordinate  or- 
ganizations. In  their  hands  alone  should  be  the  making 
of  the  programs,  the  rules,  and  the  principles  of  the  revo- 
lution. The  National  Brothers  were  to  be  under  the  di- 
rection of  the  International  Brothers,  and  were  to  be 
selected  because  of  their  revolutionary  zeal  and  their 
ability  to  control  the  masses.  They  were  "to  have  the 
devil  in  them."  The  semi-secret,  semi-public  organiza- 
tion was  to  include  the  multitude,  and  sections  were  to 
be  formed  in  every  country  for  the  purpose  of  organiz- 
ing the  masses.  However,  the  masses  were  not  to  know 
of  the  secret  organization  of  the  National  Brothers,  and 
the  National  Brothers  were  not  to  know  of  the  secret 
organization  of  the  International  Brothers.  In  order  to 
enable  them  to  work  separately  but  harmoniously,  Bakou- 
nin, who  had  chosen  himself  as  the  supreme  law-giver, 
wrote  for  each  of  the  three  orders  a  program  of  princi- 


THE  FATHER  OF  TERRORISM  13 

pies,  a  code  of  rules,  and  a  plan  of  methods  all  its  own. 
The  ultimate  ends  of  this  movement  were  not  to  be  com- 
municated to  either  the  National  Brothers  or  to  the  Alli- 
ance, and  the  masses  were  to  know  only  that  which  was 
good  for  them  to  know,  and  which  would  not  be  likely 
to  frighten  them.  These  are  very  briefly  the  outlines  of 
the  extraordinary  hierarchy  that  was  to  form  throughout 
all  Europe  and  America  an  invisible  network  of  "the  real 
revolutionists." 

This   organization   was    "to   accelerate   the   universal 
revolution,"  and  what  was  understood  by  the  revolution 
was  "the  unchaining  of  what  is  to-day  called  the  bad 
passions  and  the  destruction  of  what  in  the  same  lan- 
guage is  called  'public  order.'     We  do  not  fear,  we  in- 
voke anarchy,  convinced  that  from  this  anarchy,  that  is 
to  say,   from  the  complete  manifestation  of  unchained 
popular  life,  must  come  forth  liberty,  equality,  justice 
.     . "    ( 16)      It   was   clearly   foreseen   by    Bakounin 
that  there  would  be  opponents  to  anarchy  among  the 
revolutionists  themselves,  and  he  declared :    "We  are  the 
natural    enemies    of    these    revolutionists     .     .     .     who 
.     .     .     dream  already  of  the  creation  of  new  revolu- 
tionary States."  (17)     It  was  admitted  that  the  Brothers 
could  not  of  themselves  create  the  revolution.     All  that 
a  secret  and  well-organized  society  can  do  is  "to  organize, 
not  the  army  of  the  revolution — the  army  must  always 
be  the  people — but  a  sort  of  revolutionary  staff  composed 
of  individuals  who  are  devoted,  energetic,  intelligent,  and 
especially  sincere  friends  of  the  people,  not  ambitious 
nor  self-conceited — capable  of  serving  as  intermediaries 
between  the  revolutionary  idea  and  the  popular  instincts. 
The  number  of  these  individuals  does  not  have  to  be  im- 
mense.   For  the  international  organization  of  all  Europe, 
one  hundred  revolutionists,  strongly  and  seriously  bound 


H 


VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 


together,  are  sufficient.  Two  or  three  hundred  revolu- 
tionists will  be  sufficient  for  the  organization  of  the 
largest  country."  (18) 

The  idea  of  a  secret  organization  of  revolutionary 
leaders  proved  to  be  wholly  repugnant  to  many  of  even 
the  most  devoted  friends  of  Bakounin,  and  by  1868  the 
organization  is  supposed  to  have  been  dissolved,  because, 
it  was  said,  secrets  had  leaked  out  and  the  whole  affair 
had  been  subjected  to  much  ridicule.  (19)  The  idea 
of  the  third  order,  however,  that  of  the  International 
Alliance,  was  not  abandoned,  and  it  appears  that  Ba- 
kounin and  a  number  of  the  faithful  Brothers  felt  hope- 
ful in  1867  of  capturing  a  great  "bourgeois"  congress, 
called  the  "League  of  Peace  and  of  Liberty,"  that  had 
met  that  year  in  Geneva.  Bakounin,  Elisee  Reclus,  Aris- 
tide  Rev,  Victor  Jaclard,  and  several  others  in  the  con- 
spiracy undertook  to  persuade  the  league  to  pass  some 
revolutionary  resolutions.  Bakounin  was  already  a  mem- 
ber of  the  central  committee  of  the  league,  and,  in  prepa- 
ration for  the  battle,  he  wrote  the  manuscript  afterward 
published  under  the  title,  "Federalisme,  Socialisme,  et 
Antitheologisme."  But  the  congress  of  1868  dashed  their 
hopes  to  the  ground,  and  the  revolutionists  separated 
from  the  league  and  founded  the  same  day,  September 
25th,  a  new  association,  called  U Alliance  Internationale 
de  la  Democratie  Socialiste.  The  program  now  adopted 
by  the  Alliance,  although  written  by  Bakounin,  expressed 
quite  different  views  from  those  of  the  International 
Brothers.  But  it,  too,  began  its  revolutionary  creed  by 
declaring  itself  atheist.  Its  chief  and  most  important 
work  was  "to  abolish  religion  and  to  substitute  science 
for  faith;  and  human  justice  for  divine  justice."  Sec- 
ond, it  declared  for  "the  political,  economic,  and  social 
equality  of  the  classes"  (which,  it  was  assumed,  were  to 


THE  FATHER  OF  TERRORISM  15 

continue  to  exist),  and  it  intended  to  attain  this  end  by 
the  destruction  of  government  and  by  the  abolition  of 
the  right  of  inheritance.  Third,  it  assailed  all  forms  of 
political  action  and  proposed  that,  in  place  of  the  com- 
munity, groups  of  producers  should  assume  control  of 
all  industrial  processes.  Fourth,  it  opposed  all  central- 
ized organization,  believing  that  both  groups  and  indi- 
viduals should  demand  for  themselves  complete  liberty 
to  do  in  all  cases  whatever  they  desired.  (20)  The 
same  revolutionists  who  a  short  time  before  had  planned 
a  complete  hierarchy  now  appeared  irreconcilably  opposed 
to  any  form  of  authority.  They  now  argued  that  they 
must  abolish  not  only  God  and  every  political  State,  but 
also  the  right  of  the  majority  to  rule.  Then  and  then 
only  would  the  people  finally  attain  perfect  liberty. 

These  were  the  chief  ideas  that  Bakounin  wished  to 
introduce  into  the  International  Working  Men's  Asso- 
ciation. That  organization,  founded  in  1864  in  London, 
had  already  become  a  great  power  in  Europe,  and  Ba- 
kounin entered  it  in  1869,  not  only  for  the  purpose  of 
forwarding  the  ideas  just  mentioned,  but  also  in  the  hope 
of  obtaining  the  leadership  of  it.  Failing  in  1862  to 
convert  the  Czar,  in  1864-1867  to  organize  into  a  hier- 
archy the  revolutionary  spirits  of  Europe,  in  1868  to 
capture  the  bourgeoisie,  he  turned  in  1869  to  seek  the 
aid  of  the  working  class.  On  each  of  these  occasions  his 
views  underwent  the  most  magical  of  transformations. 
With  more  bitterness  than  ever  he  now  declared  war 
upon  the  political  and  economic  powers  of  Europe,  but 
he  was  unable  to  prosecute  this  war  until  he  had  de- 
stroyed every  committee  or  group  in  the  International 
which  possessed,  or  sought  to  possess,  any  power.  He 
assailed  Marx,  Engels,  and  all  those  who  he  thought 
wished  to  dominate  the  International.    The  beam  in  his 


16        VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

own  eye  he  saw  in  theirs,  and  he  now  expressed  an  un- 
speakable loathing  for  all  hierarchical  tendencies  and 
authoritarian  methods.  The  story  of  the  great  battle 
between  him  and  Marx  must  be  left  for  a  later  chapter, 
and  we  must  content  ourselves  for  the  present  with  fol- 
lowing the  history  of  Bakounin  as  he  gradually  devel- 
oped in  theory  and  in  practice  the  principles  and  tactics 
of  terrorism. 

While  struggling  to  obtain  the  leadership  of  the  work- 
ing classes  of  Western  Europe,  Bakounin  was  also  busy 
with  Russian  affairs.     "I  am  excessively  absorbed  in 
what  is  going  on  in  Russia,"  he  writes  to  a  friend,  April 
13,   1869.     "Our  youth,  the  most  revolutionary  in  the 
world  perhaps,  in  theory  and  in  practice,  are  so  stirred 
up  that  the  Government  has  been  forced  to  close  the  uni- 
versities, academies,  and  several  schools  at  St.  Peters- 
burg, Moscow,  and  Kazan.    I  have  here  now  a  specimen 
of  these  young  fanatics,  who  hesitate  at  nothing  and  who 
fear  nothing.     .     .     .     They  are  admirable,     ...    be- 
lievers without  God  and  heroes  without  phrase!"  (21) 
He  who  called  forth  this  eulogy  was  the  young  Russian 
revolutionist,  Sergei  Nechayeff.    Whether  admirable  or 
not  we  shall  leave  the  reader  to  judge.   But,  if  Bakounin 
bewilders  one,  Nechayeff  staggers  one.    And,  if  Bakou- 
nin was  the  father  of  terrorism,  Nechayeff  was  its  living 
embodiment.     He  was  not  complex,  mystical,  or  senti- 
mental.    He  was  truly  a  revolutionist  without  phrase, 
and  he  can  be  described  in  the  simplest  words.    He  was  a 
liar,  a  thief,  and  a  murderer — the  incarnation  of  Hatred, 
Malice,  and  Revenge,  who  stopped  at  no  crime  against 
friend  or  foe  that  promised  to  advance  what  he  was 
pleased  to  call  the  revolution.    Bakounin  had  for  a  long 
time  sought  his  cooperation,  and  now  in   Switzerland 
they  began  that  collaboration  which  resulted  in  the  most 


THE  FATHER  OF  TERRORISM  17 

extraordinary  series  of  sanguinary  revolutionary  writ- 
ings known  to  history. 

In  the  summer  of  1869  there  was  printed  at  Geneva 
"Words  Addressed  to  Students,"  signed  by  them  both; 
the  "Formula  of  the  Revolutionary  Question";  "The 
Principles  of  the  Revolution";  and  the  "Publications  of 
the  People's  Tribunal" — the  three  last  appearing  anony- 
mously. All  of  them  counsel  the  most  infamous  doc- 
trines of  criminal  activity.  In  "Words  Addressed  to  Stu- 
dents," the  Russian  youth  are  exhorted  to  leave  the  uni- 
versities and  go  among  the  people.  They  are  asked  to  fol- 
low the  example  of  Stenka  Razin,  a  robber  chieftain  who, 
in  the  time  of  Alexis,  placed  himself  at  the  head  of  a 
popular  insurrection.*  "Robbery,"  declare  Bakounin 
and  Nechayeff,  "is  one  of  the  most  honorable  forms  of 
Russian  national  life.  The  brigand  is  the  hero,  the  de- 
fender, the  popular  avenger,  the  irreconcilable  enemy  of 
the  State,  and  of  all  social  and  civil  order  established  by 
the  State.  He  is  the  wrestler  in  life  and  in  death  against 
all  this  civilization  of  officials,  of  nobles,  of  priests,  and 
of  the  crown.  .  .  .  He  who  does  not  understand 
robbery  can  understand  nothing  in  the  history  of  the 
Russian  masses.  He  who  is  not  sympathetic  with  it,  can- 
not sympathize  with  the  popular  life,  and  has  no  heart 
for  the  ancient,  unbounded  sufferings  of  the  people;  he 
belongs  in  the  camp  of  the  enemy,  the  partisans  of  the 
State  .  .  .  It  is  through  brigandage  only  that  the 
vitality,  passion,  and  force  of  the  people  are  established 

*  This  formidable  peasant  insurrection  occurred  in  1669-1671. 
When  Pougatchoff,  a  century  later,  in  1773-1775,  urged  the  Cos- 
sacks and  serfs  to  insurrection  against  Catherine  II,  the  Russian 
people  saw  in  him  a  new  Stenka  Razin ;  and  they  expected  in 
Russia,  in  1869  and  the  following  years,  a  third  centennial  ap- 
parition of  the  legendary  brigand  who,  in  the  minds  of  the  op- 
pressed people,  personified  revolt. 


18         VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

undeniably  .  .  .  The  brigand  in  Russia  is  the  veri- 
table and  unique  revolutionist — revolutionist  without 
phrase,  without  rhetoric  borrowed  from  books,  a  revolu- 
tionist indefatigable,  irreconcilable,  and  irresistible  in  ac- 
tion .  .  .  The  brigands  scattered  in  the  forests,  the 
cities,  and  villages  of  all  Russia,  and  the  brigands  con- 
fined in  the  innumerable  prisons  of  the  empire,  form  a 
unique  and  indivisible  world,  strongly  bound  together, 
the  world  of  the  Russian  revolution.  In  it,  in  it  alone, 
has  existed  for  a  long  time  the  veritable  revolutionary 
conspiracy."  (22) 

Once  again  the  principles  of  the  revolution  appear  to 
be  complete  and  universal  destruction.  "There  must  'not 
rest  .  .  .  one  stone  upon  a  stone.'  It  is  necessary 
to  destroy  everything,  in  order  to  produce  'perfect 
amorphism,'  for,  if  'a  single  one  of  the  old  forms'  were 
preserved,  it  would  become  'the  embryo'  from  which 
would  spring  all  the  other  old  social  forms."  (23)  The 
same  leaflet  preaches  systematic  assassination  and  de- 
clares that  for  practical  revolutionists  all  speculations 
about  the  future  are  "criminal,  because  they  hinder  pure 
destruction  and  trammel  the  march  of  the  revolution. 
We  have  confidence  only  in  those  who  show  by  their  acts 
their  devotion  to  the  revolution,  without  fear  of  torture 
or  of  imprisonment,  and  we  disclaim  all  words  unless 
action  should  follow  immediately."  .  .  .  (24) 
"Words  have  no  value  for  us  unless  followed  at  once 
by  action.  But  all  is  not  action  that  goes  under  that 
name :  for  example,  the  modest  and  too-cautious  organi- 
zation of  secret  societies  without  some  external  manifes- 
tations is  in  our  eyes  merely  ridiculous  and  intolerable 
child's  play.  By  external  manifestations  we  mean  a  se- 
ries of  actions  that  positively  destroy  something — a  per- 
son, a  cause,  a  condition  that  hinders  the  emancipation 


THE  FATHER  OF  TERRORISM  19 

of  the  people.  Without  sparing  our  lives,  without  paus- 
ing before  any  threat,  any  obstacle,  any  danger,  etc.,  we 
must  break  into  the  life  of  the  people  with  a  series  of 
daring,  even  insolent,  attempts,  and  inspire  them  with  a 
belief  in  their  own  power,  awake  them,  rally  them,  and 
drive  them  on  to  the  triumph  of  their  own  cause."  (25* 

The  most  remarkable  of  this  series  of  writings  is  TThe 
Revolutionary  Catechism."  This  existed  for  several 
years  in  cipher,  and  was  guarded  most  carefully  by 
Nechayeff.  Altogether  it  contained  twenty-six  articles, 
classified  into  four  sections.  Here  it  is  declared  that  if 
the  revolutionist  continues  to  live  in  this  world  it  is  only 
in  order  to  annihilate  it  all  the  more  surely.  "The  object 
remains  always  the  same :  the  quickest  and  surest  way 
of  destroying  this  filthy  order."  .  .  .  "For  him  exists 
only  one  single  pleasure,  one  single  consolation,  one  re- 
ward, one  satisfaction :  the  success  of  the  revolution. 
Night  and  day  he  must  have  but  one  thought,  but  one 
aim — implacable  destruction."  .  .  .  "For  this  end  of 
implacable  destruction  a  revolutionist  can  and  often 
must  live  in  the  midst  of  society,  feigning  to  be  alto- 
gether different  from  what  he  really  is.  A  revolutionist 
must  penetrate  everywhere :  into  high  society  as  well  as 
into  the  middle  class,  into  the  shops,  into  the  church,  into 
the  palaces  of  the  aristocracy,  into  the  official,  military, 
and  literary  worlds,  into  the  third  section  (the  secret 
police),  and  even  into  the  imperial  palace."  (26) 

"All  this  unclean  society  must  be  divided  into  several 
categories,  the  first  composed  of  those  who  are  con- 
demned to  death  without  delay."  (Sec.  15.)  .  .  , 
"In  the  first  place  must  be  destroyed  the  men  most  inimi- 
cal to  the  revolutionary  organization  and  whose  violent 
and  sudden  death  can  frighten  the  Government  the  most 
and  break  its  power  in  depriving  it  of  energetic  and  in- 


20         VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

telligent  agents."  (Sec.  16.)  "The  second  category 
must  be  composed  o£  people  to  whom  we  concede  life 
provisionally,  in  order  that  by  a  series  of  monstrous  acts 
they  may  drive  the  people  into  inevitable  revolt."  (Sec. 
17.)  "To  the  third  category  belong  a  great  number  of 
animals  in  high  position  or  of  individuals  who  are  re- 
markable neither  for  their  mind  nor  for  their  energy, 
but  who,  by  their  position,  have  wealth,  connections,  in- 
fluence, power.  We  must  exploit  them  in  every  possible 
manner,  overreach  them,  deceive  them,  and,  getting  hold 
of  their  dirty  secrets,  make  them  our  slaves."  (Sec.  18.) 
.  .  .  "The  fourth  class  is  composed  of  sundry  ambi- 
tious persons  in  the  service  of  the  State  and  of  liberals 
of  various  shades  of  opinion.  With  them  we  can  con- 
spire after  their  own  program,  pretending  to  follow  them 
blindly.  We  must  take  them  in  our  hands,  seise  their 
secrets,  compromise  them  completely,  in  such  a  way  that 
retreat  becomes  impossible  for  them,  so  as  to  make  use 
of  them  in  bringing  about  disturbances  in  the  State." 
(Sec.  19.)  "The  fifth  category  is  composed  of  doctri- 
naires, conspirators,  revolutionists,  and  of  those  who 
^babble  at  meetings  and  on  paper.  We  must  urge  these 
on  and  draw  them  incessantly  into  practical  and  perilous 
manifestations,  which  will  result  in  making  the  majority 
of  them  disappear,  while  making  some  of  them  genuine 
revolutionists."  (Sec.  20.)  "The  sixth  category  is  very 
important.  They  are  the  women,  who  must  be  divided 
into  three  classes :  the  first,  frivolous  women,  without 
mind  or  heart,  which  we  must  use  in  the  same  manner  as 
the  third  and  fourth  categories  of  men;  the  second,  the 
ardent,  devoted,  and  capable  women,  but  who  are  not 
ours  because  they  have  not  reached  a  practical  revolu- 
tionary understanding,  without  phrase — we  must  make 
use  of  these  like  the  men  of  the  fifth  category;  finally, 


THE  FATHER  OF  TERRORISM  21 

the  women  who  are  entirely  with  us,  that  is  to  say,  com- 
pletely initiated  and  having  accepted  our  program  in  its 
entirety.  We  ought  to  consider  them  as  the  most  pre- 
cious of  our  treasures,  without  whose  help  we  can  do 
nothing."     (Sec.  21.)   (27) 

The  last  section  of  the  ''Catechism"  treats  of  the  duty 
of  the  association  toward  the  people.  "The  Society  has 
no  other  end  than  the  complete  emancipation  and  happi- 
ness of  the  people,  namely,  of  the  laborers.  But,  con- 
vinced that  this  emancipation  and  this  happiness  can 
only  be  reached  by  means  of  an  all-destroying  popular 
revolution,  the  Society  will  use  every  means  and  every 
effort  to  increase  and  intensify  the  evils  and  sorrows, 
which  must  at  last  exhaust  the  patience  of  the  people 
and  excite  them  to  insurrection  en  masse.  By  a  popular 
revolution  the  Society  does  not  mean  a  movement  regu- 
lated according  to  the  classic  patterns  of  the  West,  which, 
always  restrained  in  the  face  of  property  and  of  the  tra- 
ditional social  order  of  so-called  civilization  and  morality, 
has  hitherto  been  limited  merely  to  exchanging  one  form 
of  political  organization  for  another,  and  to  the  creating 
of  a  so-called  revolutionary  State.  The  only  revolution 
that  can  do  any  good  to  the  people  is  that  which  utterly 
annihilates  every  idea  of  the  State  and  overthrows  all 
traditions,  orders,  and  classes  in  Russia.  With  this  end 
in  view,  the  Society  has  no  intention  of  imposing  on  the 
people  any  organization  whatever  coming  from  above. 
The  future  organization  will,  without  doubt,  proceed 
from  the  movement  and  life  of  the  people ;  but  that  is  the 
business  of  future  generations.  Our  task  is  terrible, 
total,  inexorable,  and  universal  destruction."  (28) 
These  are  in  brief  the  tactics  and  principles  of  terror- 
ism, as  understood  by  Bakounin  and  Nechayeff.  As 
only  the  criminal  world  shared  these  views  in  any  degree, 


22        VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

the  "Catechism"  ends :  "We  have  got  to  unite  ourselves 
with  the  adventurer's  world  of  the  brigands,  who  are  the 
veritable  and  unique  revolutionists  of  Russia."  (29) 

It  is  customary  now  to  credit  most  of  these  writings 
to  Nechayeff,  although  Bakounin  himself,  I  believe, 
never  denied  that  they  were  his,  and  no  one  can  read 
them  without  noting  the  ear-marks  of  both  Bakounin's 
thought  and  style.  In  any  case,  Nechayeff  was  con- 
stantly with  Bakounin  in  the  spring  and  summer  of  1869, 
and  the  most  important  of  these  brochures  were  pub- 
lished in  Geneva  in  the  summer  of  that  year.  And,  while 
it  may  be  said  for  Bakounin  that  he  nowhere  else  advo- 
cates all  the  varied  criminal  methods  advised  in  these 
publications,  there  is  hardly  an  argument  for  their  use 
that  is  not  based  upon  his  well-known  views.  Further- 
more, Nechayeff  was  primarily  a  man  of  action,  and  in 
a  letter,  which  is  printed  hereafter,  it  appears  that  he 
urgently  requested  Bakounin  to  develop  some  of  his  the- 
ories in  a  Russian  journal.  Evidently,  then,  Nechayeff 
had  little  confidence  in  his  own  power  of  expression. 
We  must,  however,  leave  the  question  of  paternity  un- 
decided and  follow  the  latter  to  Russia,  where  he  went 
late  in  the  summer,  loaded  down  with  his  arsenal  of  revo- 
lutionary literature  and  burning  to  put  into  practice  the 
principles  of  the  "Catechism." 

Without  following  in  detail  his  devious  and  criminal 
work,  one  brief  tale  will  explain  how  his  revolutionary 
activities  were  brought  quickly  to  an  end.  There  was  in 
Moscow,  so  the  story  runs,  a  gentle,  kindly,  and  influen- 
tial member  of  Nechayeff's  society.  Of  ascetic  disposi- 
tion, this  Iwanof  spent  much  of  his  time  in  freely  edu- 
cating the  peasants  and  in  assisting  the  poorer  students. 
He  starved  himself  to  establish  cheap  eating  houses, 
which  became  the  centers  of  the  revolutionary  groups. 


THE  FATHER  OF  TERRORISM  23 

The  police  finally  closed  his  establishments,  because 
Nechayeff  had  placarded  them  with  revolutionary  ap- 
peals. Iwanof,  quite  unhappy  at  this  ending  of  his  use- 
fulness, begged  Nechayeff  to  permit  him  to  retire  from 
the  secret  society.  Nechayeff  was,  however,  in  fear  that 
Iwanof  might  betray  the  secrets  of  the  society,  and  he 
went  one  night  with  two  fellow  conspirators  and  shot 
Iwanof  and  threw  the  corpse  into  a  pond.  The  police,  in 
following  up  the  murder,  sought  out  Nechayeff,  who  had 
already  fled  from  Russia  and  was  hurrying  back  to  Ba- 
kounin  in  Switzerland. 

From  January  until  July,  1870,  he  was  constantly  with 
Bakounin,  but  quarrels  began  to  arise  between  them  in 
June,  and  Bakounin  writes  in  a  letter  to  Ogaref :  "Our 
boy  (Nechayeff)  is  very  stubborn,  and  I,  when  once  I 
make  a  decision,  am  not  accustomed  to  change  it.  There- 
fore, the  break  with  him,  on  my  side  at  least  seems  in- 
evitable." (30)  In  the  middle  of  July  it  was  discov- 
ered that  Nechayeff  was  once  more  carrying  out  the 
ethics  they  had  jointly  evolved,  and,  in  order  to  make 
Bakounin  his  slave,  had  recourse  to  all  sorts  of  "Jesuiti- 
cal maneuvers,  of  lies  and  of  thefts."  Suddenly  he  dis- 
appeared from  Geneva,  and  Bakounin  and  other  Rus- 
sians discovered  that  they  had  been  robbed  of  all  their 
papers  and  confidential  letters.  Soon  it  was  learned  that 
Nechayeff  had  presented  himself  to  Talandier  in  London, 
and  Bakounin  hastened  to  write  to  his  friend  an  expla- 
nation of  their  relations.  "It  may  appear  strange  to  you 
that  we  advise  you  to  repulse  a  man  to  whom  we  gave 
letters  of  recommendation,  written  in  the  most  cordial 
terms.  But  these  letters  date  from  the  month  of  May, 
and  there  have  happened  since  some  events  so  serious 
that  they  have  forced  us  to  break  all  connections  with 
Nechayeff."    .     .     .     "It  is  perfectly  true  that  Nechayeff 


24        VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

is  more  persecuted  by  the  Russian  Government  than  any 
other  man.  .  .  .  It  is  also  true  that  Nechayeff  is  one 
of  the  most  active  and  most  energetic  men  that  I  have 
ever  met.  When  it  is  a  question  of  serving  what  he 
calls  the  cause,  he  does  not  hesitate,  he  stops  at  nothing, 
and  is  as  pitiless  toward  himself  as  toward  all  others. 
That  is  the  principal  quality  which  attracted  me  to  hirn 
and  which  made  me  for  a  long  time  seek  his  cooperation. 
There  are  those  who  pretend  that  he  is  nothing  but  a 
sharper,  but  that  is  a  lie.  He  is  a  devoted  fanatic,  but 
at  the  same  time  a  dangerous  fanatic,  with  whom  an  alli- 
ance could  only  prove  very  disastrous  for  everyone  con- 
cerned. This  is  the  reason :  He  first  belonged  to  a  se- 
cret society  which,  in  reality,  existed  in  Russia.  This  so- 
ciety exists  no  more ;  all  its  members  have  been  arrested. 
Nechayeff  alone  remains,  and  alone  he  constitutes  to-day 
what  he  calls  the  'Committee.'  The  Russian  organiza- 
tion in  Russia  having  been  destroyed,  he  is  forced  to 
create  a  new  one  in  a  foreign  country.  All  that  was  per- 
fectly natural,  legitimate,  very  useful — but  the  means  by 
which  he  undertakes  it  are  detestable.  .  .  .  He  will 
spy  on  you  and  will  try  to  get  possession  of  all  your  se- 
crets, and  to  do  that,  in  your  absence,  left  alone  in  your 
room,  he  will  open  all  your  drawers,  will  read  all  your 
correspondence,  and  whenever  a  letter  appears  interest- 
ing to  him,  that  is  to  say,  compromising  you  or  one  of 
your  friends  from  one  point  of  view  or  another,  he  will 
steal  it,  and  will  guard  it  carefully  as  a  document  against 
you  or  your  friend.  ...  If  you  have  presented  him 
to  a  friend,  his  first  care  will  be  to  sow  between  you 
seeds  of  discord,  scandal,  intrigue — in  a  word,  to  set 
you  two  at  variance.  If  your  friend  has  a  wife  or  a 
daughter,  he  will  try  to  seduce  her,  to  lead  her  astray, 
and  to  force  her  away  from  the  conventional  morality 


THE  FATHER  OF  TERRORISM  25 

and  throw  her  into  a  revolutionary  protest  against  so- 
ciety. .  .  .  Do  not  cry  out  that  this  is  exaggeration. 
It  has  all  been  fully  developed  and  proved.  Seeing  him- 
self unmasked,  this  poor  Nechayeff  is  indeed  so  child- 
like, so  simple,  in  spite  of  his  systematic  perversity,  that 
he  believed  it  possible  to  convert  me.  He  has  even  gone 
so  far  as  to  beg  me  to  consent  to  develop  this  theory  in  a 
Russian  journal  which  he  proposed  to  me  to  establish. 
He  has  betrayed  the  confidence  of  us  all,  he  has  stolen 
our  letters,  he  has  horribly  compromised  us — in  a  word, 
he  has  acted  like  a  villain.  His  only  excuse  is  his  fa- 
naticism. He  is  a  terribly  ambitious  man  without  know- 
ing it,  because  he  has  at  last  completely  identified  the 
revolutionary  cause  with  his  own  person.  But  he  is  not 
an  egoist  in  the  worst  sense  of  that  word,  because  he 
risks  his  own  person  terribly  and  leads  the  life  of  a  mar- 
tyr, of  privations,  and  of  unheard-of  work.  He  is  a 
fanatic,  and  fanaticism  draws  him  on,  even  to  the  point 
of  becoming  an  accomplished  Jesuit.  At  moments  he  be- 
comes simply  stupid.  Most  of  his  lies  are  sewn  with 
white  thread.  ...  In  spite  of  this  relative  naivete, 
he  is  very  dangerous,  because  he  daily  commits  acts, 
abuses  of  confidence,  and  treachery,  against  which  it  is 
all  the  more  difficult  to  safeguard  oneself  because  one 
hardly  suspects  the  possibility.  With  all  that,  Nechayeff 
is  a  force,  because  he  is  an  immense  energy.  It  is  with 
great  pain  that  I  have  separated  from  him,  because  the 
service  of  our  cause  demands  much  energy,  and  one 
rarely  finds  it  developed  to  such  a  point."  (31) 

The  irony  of  fate  rarely  executes  itself  quite  so  hu- 
morously. Although  perfectly  familiar  with  NechayefFs 
philosophy  of  action  for  over  a  year,  the  viciousness  of  it 
aopeared  to  Bakounin  only  when  he  himself  became  a 
victim.     When  Nechayeff  arrived  in  London  he  began 


26        VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

the  publication  of  a  Russian  journal,  the  Commune, 
where  he  bitterly  attacked  Bakounin  and  his  views.  Early 
in  the  seventies,  he  was  arrested  and  taken  back  to  Rus- 
sia, where  he  and  over  eighty  others,  mostly  young  men 
and  women  students,  were  tried  for  belonging  to  secret 
societies.  For  the  first  time  in  Russian  history  the  court 
proceeding  took  place  before  a  jury  and  in  public.  Most 
of  those  arrested  were  condemned  for  long  periods  to 
the  mines  of  Siberia  at  forced  labor,  while  Nechayeff 
was  kept  in  solitary  imprisonment  until  his  death,  some 
years  later. 

Bakounin,  on  the  other  hand,  remained  in  Switzerland 
and  became  the  very  soul  of  that  element  in  Italy,  Spain, 
and  Switzerland  which  fought  the  policies  of  Marx  in  the 
International.  At  the  same  time  he  was  training  a  group 
of  youngsters  to  carry  out  in  Western  Europe  the  prin- 
ciples of  revolution  as  laid  down  in  his  Russian  publica- 
tions. Over  young  middle-class  youths,  especially,  Ba- 
kounin's  magnetic  power  was  extraordinary,  and  his  fol- 
lowers were  the  faithful  of  the  faithful.  A  very  striking 
picture  of  Bakounin's  hypnotic  influence  over  this  circle 
is  to  be  found  in  the  memoirs  of  Madame  A.  Bauler. 
She  tells  us  of  some  Sundays  she  spent  with  Bakounin 
and  his  friends. 

"At  the  beginning,"  she  says,  "being  unfamiliar  with 
the  Italian  language,  I  did  not  even  understand  the  gen- 
eral drift  of  the  conversation,  but,  observing  the  faces 
of  those  present,  I  had  the  impression  that  something  ex- 
traordinarily grave  and  solemn  was  taking  place.  The 
atmosphere  of  these  conferences  imbued  me;  it  created 
in  me  a  state  of  mind  which  I  shall  call,  for  want  of  a 
better  term,  an  'etat  de  grace.'  Faith  increased ;  doubts 
vanished.  The  value  of  Bakounin  became  clear  to  me. 
His  personality  enlarged.     I  saw  that  his  strength  was 


THE  FATHER  OF  TERRORISM  27 

in  the  power  of  taking  possession  of  human  souls.  Be- 
yond a  doubt,  all  these  men  who  were  listening  to  him 
were  ready  to  undertake  anything,  at  the  slightest  word 
from  him.  I  could  picture  to  myself  another  gathering, 
less  intimate,  that  of  a  great  crowd,  and  I  realized  that 
there  the  influence  of  Bakounin  would  be  the  same.  Only 
the  enthusiasm,  here  gentle  and  intimate,  would  become 
incomparably  more  intense  and  the  atmosphere  more  agi- 
tated by  the  mutual  contagion  of  the  human  beings  in  a 
crowd. 

"At  bottom,  in  what  did  the  charm  of  Bakounin  con- 
sist? I  believe  that  it  is  impossible  to  define  it  exactly. 
It  was  not  by  the  force  of  persuasion  that  he  agitated. 
It  was  not  his  thought  which  awakened  the  thought  of 
others.  But  he  aroused  every  rebellious  heart  and  awoke 
there  an  'elemental'  anger.  And  this  anger,  transplen- 
dent with  beauty,  became  creative  and  showed  to  the  ex- 
alted thirst  for  justice  and  happiness  an  issue  and  a  pos- 
sibility of  accomplishment.  'The  desire  for  destruction  is 
at  the  same  time  a  creative  desire,'  Bakounin  has  re- 
peated to  the  end  of  his  life."  (32) 


CHAPTER   II 

A   SERIES   OF   INSURRECTIONS 

At  the  beginning  of  the  seventies  Bakounin  and  his 
friends  found  opening  before  them  a  field  of  practical 
activity.     On  the  whole,  the  sixties  were  spent  in  the- 
orizing, in  organizing,  and  in  planning,  but  with  the  sev- 
enties the  moment  arrived  "to  unchain  the  hydra  of  revo- 
lution."   On  the  4th  of  September,  1870,  the  Third  Re- 
public was  proclaimed  in  Paris,  and  a  few  days  after- 
ward there  were  many  uprisings  in  the  other  cities  of 
France.     It  was,  however,  only  in  Lyons  that  the  Ba- 
kouninists  played  an  important  part.     Bakounin  had  a 
fixed  idea  that,  wherever  there  was  an  uprising  of  the 
people,  there  he  must  go,  and  he  wrote  to  Adolphe  Vogt 
on  September  6 :    "My  friends,  the  revolutionary  social- 
ists of  Lyons,  are  calling  me  there.  I  am  resolved  to  take 
my  old  bones  thither  and  to  play  there  what  will  probably 
be  my  last  game.    But,  as  usual,  I  have  not  a  sou.     Can 
you,  I  do  not  say  lend  me,  but  give  me  500  or  400,  or 
300  or  200,  or  even  100  francs,  for  my  voyage?"   (1) 
Guillaume  does  not  state  where  the  money  finally  came 
from,  but  Bakounin  evidently  raised  it  somehow,  for  he 
left  Locarno  on  September  9.    The  night  of  the  nth  he 
spent  in  Neuchatel,  where  he  conferred  with  Guillaume 
regarding  the  publication  of  a  manuscript.    On  the  12th 
he  arrived  in  Geneva,  and  two  days  later  set  out  for 
Lyons,   accompanied   by  two   revolutionary  enthusiasts, 
Ozerof  and  the  young  Pole,  Valence  Lankiewicz. 

28 


A  SERIES  OF  INSURRECTIONS  29 

Since  the  4th  of  September  a  Committee  of  Public 
Safety  had  been  installed  at  the  Hotel  de  Ville  composed 
of  republicans,  radicals,  and  some  militants  of  the  Inter- 
national. Gaspard  Blanc  and  Albert  Richard,  two  inti- 
mate friends  of  Bakounin,  were  not  members  of  this 
committee,  and  in  a  public  meeting,  September  8,  Rich- 
ard made  a  motion,  which  was  carried,  to  name  a  stand- 
ing commission  of  ten  to  act  as  the  "intermediaries  be- 
tween the  people  of  Lyons  and  the  Committee  of  Public 
Safety."  Three  of  these  commissioners,  Richard,  An- 
drieux,  and  Jaclard,  were  then  appointed  to  go  as  dele- 
gates to  Paris  in  order  to  come  to  some  understanding 
with  the  Government.  Andrieux,  in  the  days  of  the  Em- 
pire, had  acquired  fame  as  a  revolutionist  by  proposing 
at  a  meeting  to  burn  the  ledger  of  the  public  debt.  It 
seems,  however,  that  these  close  and  trusted  friends  of 
Bakounin  began  immediately  upon  their  arrival  in  Paris 
to  solicit  various  public  positions  remunerative  to  them- 
selves, (2)  and,  although  they  succeeded  in  having  Gen- 
eral Cluseret  sent  to  take  command  of  the  voluntary 
corps  then  forming  in  the  department  of  the  Rhone,  that 
proved,  as  we  shall  see,  most  disastrous  of  all. 

This  is  about  all  that  had  happened  previous  to 
Bakounin's  arrival  in  Lyons,  and,  when  he  came,  there 
was  confusion  everywhere.  Even  the  members  of  the 
Alliance  had  no  clear  idea  of  what  ought  to  be  done. 
Bakounin,  however,  was  an  old  hand  at  insurrections,  and 
in  a  little  lodging  house  where  he  and  his  friends  were 
staying  a  new  uprising  was  planned.  He  lost  no  time 
in  getting  hold  of  all  the  men  of  action.  Under  his  en- 
ergetic leadership  "public  meetings  were  multiplied  and 
assumed  a  character  of  unheard-of  violence.  The  most 
sanguinary  motions  were  introduced  and  welcomed  with 
enthusiasm.     They  openly  provoked  revolt  in  order  to 


3o         VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

overthrow  the  laws  and  the  established  order  of 
things."  (3)  On  September  19  Bakounin  wrote  to  Oga- 
ref :  "There  is  so  much  work  to  do  that  it  turns  my 
head.  The  real  revolution  has  not  yet  burst  forth  here, 
but  it  will  come.  Everything  possible  is  being  done  to 
prepare  for  it.  I  am  playing  a  great  game.  I  hope  to 
see  the  approaching  triumph."  (4) 

A  great  public  meeting  was  held  on  the  24th,  presided 
over  by  Eugene  Saignes,  a  plasterer  and  painter,  and  a 
man  of  energy  and  influence  among  the  Lyons  workmen, 
at  which  various  questions  relative  to  proposed  political 
changes  were  voted  upon.  But  it  was  the  following  day, 
the  25th,  that  probably  the  most  notable  event  of  the  in- 
surrection took  place.  "The  next  day,  Sunday,  was  em- 
ployed," Guillaume  says,  "in  the  drawing  up  and  printing 
of  a  great  red  placard,  containing  the  program  of  the 
revolution  which  the  Central  Committee  of  Safety  of 
France  proposed  to  the  people  .  .  ."  (5)  The  first 
article  of  the  program  declares :  "The  administrative 
and  governmental  machinery  of  the  State,  having  become 
powerless,  is  abolished.  The  people  of  France  once  again 
enter  into  full  possession  of  themselves."  The  second 
article  suspends  "all  civil  and  criminal  courts,"  and  re- 
places them  "by  the  justice  of  the  people."  The  third 
suspends  "the  payment  of  taxes  and  of  mortgages."  The 
fourth  declares  that  "the  State,  having  decayed,  can 
no  longer  intervene  in  the  payment  of  private  debts." 
The  fifth  states  that  "all  existing  municipal  organizations 
are  broken  up  and  replaced  in  all  the  federated  com- 
munes by  Committees  of  Safety  of  France,  which  will 
exercise  all  powers  under  the  immediate  control  of  the 
people."  The  revolution  was  at  last  launched,  and  the 
placard  ends,  "Aux  ArmesWV  (6) 

While  the  Bakouninists  were  decreeing  the  revolution 


A  SERIES  OF  INSURRECTIONS  31 

by  posters  and  vainly  calling  the  people  to  arms,  an  event 
occurred  in  Lyons  which  brought  to  them  a  very  useful 
contingent  of  fighters.  The  Lyons  municipality  had  just 
reduced  the  pay  of  the  workers  in  the  national  dock 
yards  from  three  to  two  and  a  half  francs  a  day,  and, 
on  this  account,  these  laborers  joined  the  ranks  of  the 
insurgents.  On  the  evening  of  September  27  a  meeting 
of  the  Central  Committee  of  Safety  of  France  took 
place,  and  there  a  definite  plan  of  action  for  the  next  day 
was  decided  upon.  Velay,  a  tulle  maker  and  municipal 
councillor,  Bakounin,  and  others  advised  an  armed  mani- 
festation, but  the  majority  expressed  itself  in  favor  of  a 
peaceful  one.  An  executive  committee  composed  of 
eight  members  signed  the  following  proclamation,  drawn 
up  by  Gaspard  Blanc,  which  was  printed  during  the  night 
and  posted  early  the  next  morning :  "The  people  of 
Lyons  .  .  .  are  summoned,  through  the  organ  of 
their  assembled  popular  committees,  to  a  popular  mani- 
festation to  be  held  to-day,  September  28,  at  noon,  on  the 
Place  dcs  Terrcaux,  in  order  to  force  the  authority  to 
take  immediately  the  most  energetic  and  efficacious  meas- 
ures for  the  national  defense."  (7) 

Turning  again  to  Guillaume,  we  find  "At  noon  many 
thousands  of  men  pressed  together  on  the  Place  des 
Terreanx.  A  delegation  of  sixteen  of  the  national  dock- 
yard workmen  entered  the  Hotel  de  Ville  to  demand  of 
the  Municipal  Council  the  reestablishment  of  their  wage 
to  three  francs  a  day,  but  the  Council  was  not  in  session. 
Very  soon  a  movement  began  in  the  crowd,  and  a  hun- 
dred resolute  men,  Saignes  at  their  head,  forcing  the 
door  of  the  Hotel  de  Ville,  penetrated  the  municipal 
building.  Some  members  of  the  Central  Committee  of 
Safety  of  France,  Bakounin,  Parraton,  Bastelica,  and 
others,  went  in  with  them.     From  the  balcony,  Saignes 


32         VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

announced  that  the  Municipal  Council  was  to  be  com- 
pelled to  accept  the  program  of  the  red  proclamation  of 
September  26  or  to  resign,  and  he  proposed  to  name 
Cluseret  general  of  the  revolutionary  army.  Cluseret, 
cheered  by  the  crowd,  appeared  in  the  balcony,  thanked 
them,  and  announced  that  he  was  going  to  Croix- 
Rousse"  (the  working-class  district).  (8)  He  went  there, 
it  is  true,  but  not  to  call  to  arms  the  national  guards  of 
that  quarter.  Indeed,  his  aim  appears  to  have  been  to 
avoid  a  conflict,  and  he  simply  asked  the  workers  "to 
come  down  en  masse  and  without  arms."  (9)  In  the 
meantime  the  national  guards  of  the  wealthier  quarters  of 
the  city  hastened  to  the  Hotel  de  Ville  and  penetrated 
the  interior  court,  while  the  Committee  of  Safety  of 
France  installed  itself  inside  the  building.  There  they 
passed  two  or  three  hours  in  drawing  up  resolutions, 
while  Bakounin  and  others  in  vain  protested:  "We 
must  act.  We  are  losing  time.  We  are  going  to  be  in- 
vaded by  the  national  bourgeois  guard.  It  is  necessary 
to  arrest  immediately  the  prefect,  the  mayor,  and  Gen- 
eral Mazure."  (10)  But  their  words  went  unheeded. 
And  all  the  while  the  bourgeois  guards  were  massing 
themselves  before  the  Hotel  de  Ville,  and  Cluseret  and 
his  unarmed  manifestants  were  yielding  place  to  them. 
In  fact,  Cluseret  even  persuaded  the  members  of  the 
Committee  of  Safety  to  retire  and  those  of  the  Municipal 
Council  to  return  to  their  seats,  which  they  consented  to 
do. 

Bakounin  made  a  last  desperate  effort  to  save  the  situ- 
ation and  to  induce  the  insurgents  to  oppose  force  to 
force,  but  they  would  not.  Even  Albert  Richard  failed 
him.  The  Revolutionary  committee,  after  parleying  with 
the  Municipal  Councillors,  then  evacuated  the  Hotel  de 
Ville    and    contented    itself    with    issuing    a    statement 


A  SERIES  OF  INSURRECTIONS  33 

to  the  effect  that  "The  delegates  of  the  people  have  not 
believed  it  their  duty  to  impose  themselves  on  the  Mu- 
nicipal Council  by  violence  and  have  retired  when  it  went 
into  session,  leaving  it  to  the  people  to  fully  appreciate 
the  situation."  (11)  "At  the  moment,"  says  Guillaume, 
"when  .  .  .  Mayor  Henon,  with  an  escort  of  na- 
tional bourgeois  guards,  reentered  the  Hotel  de  Ville,  he 
met  Bakounin  in  the  hall  of  the  Pas-Pcrdus.  The  mayor 
immediately  ordered  his  companions  to  take  him  in  cus- 
tody and  to  confine  him  at  once  in  an  underground  hid- 
ing-place." (12)  The  Municipal  Councillors  then  opened 
their  session  and  pledged  that  no  pursuit  should  be  in- 
stituted in  view  of  the  happenings  of  the  day.  They 
voted  to  reestablish  the  former  wage  of  the  national 
dock-yard  workers,  but  declared  themselves  unable  to 
undertake  the  revolutionary  measures  proposed  by  the 
Committee  of  Safety  of  France,  as  these  were  outside 
their  legal  province. 

In  the  meantime  Bakounin  was  undergoing  an  ex- 
perience far  from  pleasant,  if  we  are  to  judge  from  the 
account  which  he  gives  in  a  letter  written  the  following 
day:  "Some  used  me  brutally  in  all  sorts  of  ways, 
jostling  me  about,  pushing  me,  pinching  me,  twisting  my 
arms  and  hands.  I  must,  however,  admit  that  others 
cried:  'Do  not  harm  him.'  In  truth  the  bourgeoisie 
showed  itself  what  it  is  everywhere :  brutal  and  cow- 
ardly. For  you  know  that  I  was  delivered  by  some 
sharpshooters  who  put  to  flight  three  or  four  times 
their  number  of  these  heroic  shopkeepers  armed  with 
their  rifles.  I  was  delivered,  but  of  all  the  objects  which 
had  been  stolen  from  me  by  these  gentlemen  I  was  able 
to  find  only  my  revolver.  My  memorandum  book  and 
my  purse,  which  contained  165  francs  and  some  sous, 
without  doubt  stayed  in  the  hands  of  these  gentlemen. 


34        VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

.  .  .  I  beg  you  to  reclaim  them  in  my  name.  You  will 
send  them  to  me  when  you  have  recovered  them."  (13) 
As  a  matter  of  fact,  it  was  at  the  instance  of  his  fol- 
lower, Ozerof,  that  Bakounin  was  finally  delivered. 
When  he  came  forth  from  the  Hotel  de  Ville,  the  Com- 
mittee of  Safety  of  France  and  its  thousands  of  sympa- 
thizers had  disappeared,  and  he  found  himself  practically 
alone.  He  spent  the  night  at  the  house  of  a  friend,  and 
departed  for  Marseilles  the  next  day,  after  writing  the 
following  letter  to  Palix:  "My  dear  friend,  I  do  not 
wish  to  leave  Lyons  without  having  said  a  last  word  of 
farewell  to  you.  Prudence  keeps  me  from  coming  to 
shake  hands  with  you  for  the  last  time.  I  have  nothing 
more  to  do  here.  I  came  to  Lyons  to  fight  or  to  die 
with  you.  I  came  because  I  am  profoundly  convinced 
that  the  cause  of  France  has  become  again,  at  this  su- 
preme hour,  .  .  .  the  cause  of  humanity.  T  have 
taken  part  in  yesterday's  movement,  and  I  have  signed 
my  name  to  the  resolutions  of  the  Committee  of  Safety 
of  France,  because  it  is  evident  to  me  that,  after  the 
real  and  certain  destruction  of  all  the  administrative  and 
governmental  machinery,  there  is  nothing  but  the  imme- 
diate and  revolutionary  action  of  the  people  which  can 
save  France.  .  .  .  The  movement  of  yesterday,  if  it 
had  been  successful  .  .  .  could  have  saved  Lyons 
and  France.  ...  I  leave  Lyons,  dear  friend,  with  a 
heart  full  of  sadness  and  somber  forebodings.  I  begin 
to  think  now  that  it  is  finished  with  France.  .  .  . 
She  will  become  a  viceroyalty  of  Germany.  In  place  of 
her  living  and  real  socialism*  we  shall  have  the  doc- 

*  Previous  to  1848,  socialism  was  used  by  Robert  Owen  and 
his  followers,  as  well  as  by  many  French  idealists,  to  mean 
phalansteries,  colonies,  or  other  voluntary  communal  under- 
takings.    Marx  and  Engels  at  first  called  themselves  "commun- 


A  SERIES  OF  INSURRECTIONS  35 

trinaire  socialism  of  the  Germans,  who  will  say  no  more 
than  the  Prussian  bayonets  will  permit  them  to  say.  The 
bureaucratic  and  military  intelligence  of  Prussia,  com- 
bined with  the  knout  of  the  Czar  of  St.  Petersburg,  are 
going  to  assure  peace  and  public  order  for  at  least  fifty 
years  on  the  whole  continent  of  Europe.  Farewell,  lib- 
erty! Farewell,  socialism!  Farewell,  justice  for  the 
people  and  the  triumph  of  humanity!  All  that  could 
have  grown  out  of  the  present  disaster  of  France.  All 
that  would  have  grown  out  of  it  if  the  people  of  France, 
if  the  people  of  Lyons,  had  wished  it."  (14) 

The  insurrection  at  Lyons  and  Bakounin's  decree 
abolishing  the  State  amounted  to  very  little  in  the  history 
of  the  French  Republic.  Writing  afterward  to  Pro- 
fessor Edward  Spencer  Beesly,  Karl  Marx  comments 
on  the  events  that  had  taken  place  in  Lyons :  "At  the 
beginning  everything  went  well,"  he  writes.  "Under  the 
pressure  of  the  section  of  the  International,  the  Republic 
had  been  proclaimed  at  Lyons  before  it  had  been  at  Paris. 
A  revolutionary  government  was  immediately  estab- 
lished, namely  the  Commune,  composed  in  part  of  work- 
men belonging  to  the  International,  in  part  of  bourgeois 
radical  republicans  .  .  .  But  those  blunderers,  Ba- 
kounin  and  Cluseret,  arrived  at  Lyons  and  spoiled  every- 
thing. Both  being  members  of  the  International,  they 
had  unfortunately  enough  influence  to  lead  our  friends 
astray,     The  Hotel  de  Ville  was  taken,  for  a  moment 

ists,"  and  were  thus  distinguished  from  these  earlier  socialists. 
During  the  period  of  the  International  all  its  members  began 
more  and  more  to  call  themselves  "socialists."  The  word,  an- 
archism, was  rarely  used.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  it  was  the  strug- 
gle in  the  International  which  eventually  clarified  the  views  of 
both  anarchists  and  socialists  and  made  clear  the  distinctions 
now  recognized  between  communism,  anarchism,  and  socialism. 
See  Chapter  VIII,  infra. 


36        VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

only,  and  very  ridiculous  decrees  on  the  abolition  of  the 
State  and  other  nonsense  were  issued.  You  understand 
that  the  fact  alone  of  a  Russian — whom  the  newspapers 
of  the  bourgeoisie  represented  as  an  agent  of  Bismarck — ■ 
pretending  to  thrust  himself  at  the  head  of  a  Committee 
of  Safety  of  France  was  quite  sufficient  to  change  com- 
pletely public  opinion.  As  to  Cluseret,  he  behaved  at 
once  like  an  idiot  and  a  coward.  These  two  men  left 
Lyons  after  their  failure."  (15)  Bakounin's  so-called 
abolition  of  the  State  appealed  to  the  humor  of  Marx. 
He  speaks  of  it  in  another  place  in  these  words :  "Then 
arrived  the  critical  moment,  the  moment  longed  for  since 
many  years,  when  Bakounin  was  able  to  accomplish  the 
most  revolutionary  act  the  world  has  ever  seen :  he  de- 
creed the  abolition  of  the  State.  But  the  State,  in  the 
form  and  aspect  of  two  companies  of  national  bourgeois 
guards,  entered  by  a  door  which  they  had  forgotten  to 
guard,  swept  the  hall,  and  caused  Bakounin  to  hasten 
back  along  the  road  to  Geneva."  (16) 

Such  indeed  was  the  humiliating  and  vexatious  ending 
of  Bakounin's  dream  of  an  immediate  social  revolution. 
His  sole  reward  was  to  be  jostled,  pinched,  and  robbed. 
This  was  perhaps  most  tragic  of  all,  especially  when 
added  to  this  injury  there  was  the  further  indignity  of 
allowing  the  father  of  terrorism  to  keep  his  revolver. 
The  incident  is  one  that  George  Meredith  should  have 
immortalized  in  another  of  his  "Tragic  Comedians." 
However,  although  the  insurrection  at  Lyons  was  a  com- 
plete failure,  the  Commune  of  Paris  was  really  a  spon- 
taneous and  memorable  working-class  uprising.  The  de- 
tails of  that  insurrection,  the  legislation  of  the  Commune 
itself,  and  its  violent  suppression  on  May  28,  1871,  are 
not  strictly  germane  to  this  chapter,  because,  in  fact,  the 
Bakouninists  played  no  part  in  it.    In  the  case  of  Lyons, 


A  SERIES  OF  INSURRECTIONS  37 

the  revolution  maker  was  at  work ;  in  the  case  of  Paris, 
"The  working  class,"  says  Marx,  "did  not  expect  mira- 
cles from  the  Commune.  They  have  no  ready-made 
Utopias  to  introduce  par  dccret  du  peuple.  They  know 
that  in  order  to  work  out  their  own  emancipation,  and 
along  with  it  that  higher  form  to  which  present  society 
is  irresistibly  tending,  by  its  own  economic  agencies,  they 
will  have  to  pass  through  long  struggles,  through  a  series 
of  historic  processes,  transforming  circumstances  and 
men."  *  But,  while  Marx  wrote  in  this  manner  of  the 
Paris  Commune,  he  evidently  had  in  mind  men  of  the 
type  of  Bakounin  when  he  declared :  "In  every  revolu- 
tion there  intrude,  at  the  side  of  its  true  agents,  men  of 
a  different  stamp ;  some  of  them  survivors  of  and  de- 
votees to  past  revolutions,  .  .  .  others  mere  bawlers, 
who  by  dint  of  repeating  year  after  year  the  same  set  of 
stereotyped  declamations  against  the  Government  of  the 
day  have  sneaked  into  the  reputation  of  revolutionists 
of  the  first  water.  After  the  18th  of  March  some  such 
men  turned  up,  and  in  some  cases  contrived  to  play  pre- 
eminent parts.  As  far  as  their  power  went,  they  ham- 
pered the  real  action  of  the  working  class,  exactly  as  men 
of  that  sort  have  hampered  the  full  development  of  every 
previous  revolution.  They  are  an  unavoidable  evil ;  with 
time  they  are  shaken  off ;  but  time  was  not  allowed  to  the 
Commune."  (17) 

The  despair  of  Bakounin  over  the  miserable  ending  of 
his  great  plans  for  the  salvation  of  France  had,  of  course, 
disappeared  long  before  the  revolution  broke  out  in 
Spain,  and  he  easily  persuaded  himself  that  his  presence 

*  This  is  from  "The  Commune  of  Paris,"  which  was  read 
by  Marx  to  the  General  Council  of  the  International  on  May 
30,  two  days  after  the  last  of  the  combatants  of  the  Commune 
were  crushed  by  superior  numbers  on  the  heights  of  Belleville. 


38        VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

there  was  absolutely  necessary  to  insure  its  success.  "I 
have  always  felt  and  thought,"  he  wrote  in  the  Memoir* 
justiUcatif,  "that  the  most  desirable  end  for  me  would  be 
to  fall  in  the  midst  of  a  great  revolutionary  storm."  (18) 
Consequently,  in  the  summer  of  the  year  1873,  when  the 
uprising  gave  promise  of  victory  to  the  insurgents,  Ba- 
kounin  decided  that  he  must  go  and,  to  do  so,  that  he 
must  have  money.  Bakounin  then  wrote  to  his  wealthy 
young  disciple,  Cafiero,  in  a  symbolic  language  which 
they  had  worked  out  between  them,  declaring  his  inten- 
tion of  going  to  Spain  and  asking  him  to  furnish  the 
necessary  money  for  his  expenses.  As  usual,  Bakounin 
became  melodramatic  in  his  effort  to  work  upon  the  im- 
pressionable Cafiero,  and,  as  he  put  it  afterward  in  the 
Memoir e  justiUcatif,  "I  added  a  prayer  that  he  would  be- 
come the  protector  of  my  wife  and  my  children,  in  case 
I  should  fall  in  Spain."  (19)  Cafiero,  who  at  this  time 
worshiped  Bakounin,  pleaded  with  him  not  to  risk  his 
precious  life  in  Spain.  He  promised  to  do  everything 
possible  for  his  family  in  case  he  persisted  in  going,  but 
he  sent  no  money,  whether  because  he  did  not  have  it  or 
because  he  did  not  wish  Bakounin  to  go  is  not  clear. 
Bakounin  now  wrote  to  Guillaume  that  he  was  greatly 
disappointed  not  to  be  able  to  take  part  in  the  Spanish 
revolution,  but  that  it  was  impossible  for  him  to  do  so 
without  money.  Guillaume  admits  that  he  was  not  con- 
vinced of  the  absolute  necessity  of  Bakounin's  presence 
in  Spain,  but,  nevertheless,  since  he  desired  to  go  there, 
Guillaume  offered  to  secure  for  him  fifteen  hundred 
francs  to  make  the  journey.  On  the  receipt  of  this  news, 
Bakounin  answered  Guillaume  that  the  sum  would  be 
wholly  insufficient. 

If,  however,  the  Spanish  revolution  was  forced  to  pro- 
ceed without  Bakounin,  his  influence  in  that  country  was 


A  SERIES  OF  INSURRECTIONS  39 

not  wanting.  In  the  year  1873  the  Spanish  sections  of 
the  International  were  among  the  largest  and  most  nu- 
merous in  Europe.  At  the  time  of  the  congress  of  Cor- 
dova, which  assembled  at  the  close  of  the  year  1872, 
three  hundred  and  thirty-one  sections  with  over  twenty- 
five  thousand  members  expressed  themselves  in  favor  of 
"anarchist  and  collectivist"  principles.  The  trade  unions 
were  very  active,  and  they  formed  the  basis  of  the  Span- 
ish movement.  They  had  numerous  organs  of  propa- 
ganda, and  the  general  unrest,  both  political  and  eco- 
nomic, led  for  a  time  to  an  extraordinary  development 
in  revolutionary  ideas. 

On  February  11,  1873,  the  king  abdicated  and  a  re- 
public was  proclaimed.  Insurrections  broke  out  in  all 
parts  of  Spain.  At  Barcelona,  Cartagena,  Murcia, 
Cadiz,  Seville,  Granada,  and  Valencia  there  existed  a 
state  of  civil  war,  while  throughout  the  industrial  dis- 
tricts strikes  were  both  frequent  and  violent.  Demands 
were  made  on  all  sides  for  shorter  hours  and  increase  of 
wages.  At  Alcoy  ten  thousand  workingmen  declared  a 
general  strike,  and,  when  the  municipal  authorities  op- 
posed them,  they  took  the  town  by  storm.  In  some  cases 
the  strikers  lent  their  support  to  the  republicans ;  in  other 
cases  they  followed  the  ideas  of  Bakounin,  and  openly 
declared  they  had  no  concern  for  the  republic.  The 
changes  in  the  government  were  numerous.  Indeed,  for 
three  years  Spain,  politically  and  industrially,  was  in  a 
state  of  chaos.  At  times  the  revolt  of  the  workers  was 
suppressed  with  the  utmost  brutality.  Their  leaders  were 
arrested,  their  papers  suppressed,  and  their  meetings  dis- 
persed with  bloodshed.  At  other  times  they  were  allowed 
to  riot  for  weeks  if  the  turbulence  promised  to  aid  the 
intrigues  of  the  politicians. 

A  lively  discussion  took  place  as  to  the  wisdom  of  the 


4o        VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

tactics  employed  by  the  anarchists  in  Spain.    Frederick 
Engels  severely  criticised  the  position  of  the  Bakouninists 
in  two  articles  which  he  published  in  the  Volksstaat.    He 
reviewed  the  events  that  had  taken  place  during  the  sum- 
mer of  1873,  and  he  condemned  the  folly  of  the  anar- 
chists, who  had  refused  to  cooperate  with  the  other  revo- 
lutionary forces  in  Spain.     In  his  opinion,  the  workers 
were  simply  wasting  their  energy  and  lives  in  pursuit 
of  a  distant  and  unattainable  end.     "Spain  is  a  country 
so  backward  industrially,"  he  wrote,  "that  it  cannot  be  a 
question  there  of  the  immediate  complete  emancipation 
of  the  workers.    Before  arriving  at  that  stage,  Spain  will 
still  have  to  pass  through  diverse  phases  of  development 
and  struggle  against  a  whole  series  of  obstacles.    The  re- 
public  furnished  the  means   of  passing  through   these 
phases  most  rapidly  and  of  removing  these  obstacles 
most   quickly.      But,   to    accomplish   that,    the    Spanish 
proletariat  would  have  had  to  launch  boldly  into  active 
politics.     The  mass  of  the  working  people  realized  this, 
and  everywhere  demanded  that  they  should  take  part  in 
what  was  happening,  that  they  should  profit  by  the  op- 
portunities to  act,  instead  of  leaving,  as  formerly,  the 
field  free  to  the  action  and  intrigues  of  the  possessing 
classes.     The  government  ordered  elections  for  the  Cor- 
tes members.     What  position  should  the   International 
take  ?    The  leaders  of  the  Bakouninists  were  in  the  great- 
est dilemma.     A  continued  political  inactivity  appeared 
more  ridiculous  and  more  impossible  from  day  to  day. 
The  workers  wanted  to  'see  deeds.'    On  the  other  hand, 
the  alliancistes  (Bakouninists)   had  preached  for  years 
that  one  ought  not  to  take  part  in  any  revolution  that 
had  not  for  its  end  the  immediate  and  entire  emancipa- 
tion of  the  workers,  that  participation  in  any  political 
action  constituted  an  acceptance  of  the  principle  of  the 


A  SERIES  OF  INSURRECTIONS  41 

State,  that  source  of  all  evil,  and  that  especially  taking 
part  in  any  election  was  a  mortal  sin."  (20) 

The  anarchists  were  of  course  very  bitter  over  this 
attack  on  their  policies,  and  they  concluded  that  the  so- 
cialists had  become  reactionaries  who  no  longer  sought 
the  emancipation  of  the  working  class.  They  were  more 
than  incensed  at  the  reference  Engels  had  made  to  an 
act  of  the  insurgents  of  Cartagena,  who,  in  order  to  gain 
allies  in  their  struggle,  had  armed  the  convicts  of  a 
prison,  "eighteen  hundred  villains,  the  most  dangerous 
robbers  and  murderers  of  Spain."  (21)  According  to 
Engels'  information,  this  infamous  act  had  been  under- 
taken upon  the  advice  of  Bakounin,  but,  whether  or  not 
that  is  true,  it  was  a  fatal  mistake  that  brought  utter  dis- 
aster to  the  insurgents. 

Certainly  of  this  fact  there  can  be  no  question — the 
divisions  among  the  revolutionary  forces  in  Spain,  which 
Engels  deplored,  resulted,  after  many  months  of  fighting, 
in  returning  to  power  the  most  reactionary  elements  in 
Spain.  And  this  was  foreseen,  as  even  before  the  end 
of  the  summer  Bakounin  had  despaired  of  success.  In 
his  opinion,  the  Spanish  revolution  miscarried  miserably, 
"for  want,"  as  he  afterward  wrote,  "of  energy  and  revo- 
lutionary spirit  in  the  leaders  as  well  as  in  the  masses. 
And  all  the  rest  of  the  world  was  plunged,"  he  lamented, 
"into  the  most  dismal  reaction."   (22) 

France  and  Spain,  having  now  failed  to  launch  the 
universal  revolution,  Bakounin's  hopes  turned  to  Italy, 
where  a  series  of  artificial  uprisings  among  the  almost 
famished  peasants  was  being  stirred  up  by  his  followers. 
Their  greatest  activity  was  during  the  first  two  weeks  in 
August  of  the  next  year,  1874,  and  the  three  main  cen- 
ters were  Bologna,  Romagna,  and  Apulia.  In  spite  of 
the  fact  that  the  followers  of  Mazzini  were  opposed  to 


42        VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

the  International,  an  attempt  was  made  in  the  summer  of 
1874  by  some  Italian  socialists  (Celso  Cerretti  among 
others),  to  effect  a  union  in  order  that  by  common  action 
they  might  work  more  advantageously  against  the  mon- 
archy. Garibaldi,  to  whom  these  socialists  appealed,  at 
first  disapproved  of  any  reconciliation  with  Bakounin 
and  his  friends,  but  later  allowed  himself  to  be  per- 
suaded. A  meeting  of  the  Mazzinian  leaders  to  discuss 
the  matter  convened  August  2  at  the  village  of  Ruffi. 
The  older  members  were  opposed  to  all  common  action, 
while  the  younger  elements  desired  it.  However,  before 
an  agreement  was  reached,  twenty-eight  Mazzinians  were 
arrested,  among  them  Saffi,  Fortis,  and  Yalzania.  Three 
days  later,  the  police  succeeded  in  arresting  Andrea 
Costa,  for  whom  they  had  been  searching  for  more  than 
a  year  on  account  of  his  participation  in  the  Interna- 
tional congress  at  Geneva.  Although  these  events  were 
something  of  a  setback,  the  revolutionists  decided  that 
they  had  gone  too  far  to  retreat.  It  was  then  that  Ba- 
kounin wrote :  "And  now,  my  friends,  there  remains 
nothing  more  for  me  but  to  die.  Farewell!"  (23)  On 
the  way  to  Italy  he  wrote  to  his  friend,  Guillaume,  say- 
ing good-by  to  him  and  announcing,  without  explana- 
tion, that  he  was  journeying  to  Italy  to  take  part  in  a 
struggle  from  which  he  would  not  return  alive.  On  his 
arrival  in  that  country,  however,  he  carefully  concealed 
himself  in  a  small  house  where  only  the  revolutionary 
"intimates"  could  see  him. 

The  nights  of  August  7  and  8  had  been  chosen  for  the 
insurrection  which  was  to  burst  forth  in  Bologna  and 
thence  to  extend,  first  to  Romagna,  and  afterward  to  the 
Marches  and  Tuscany.  A  group  of  Bologna  insurgents, 
reinforced  by  about  three  thousand  others  from  Ro- 
magna, were  to  enter  Bologna  by  the  San  Felice  gate. 


A  SERIES  OF  INSURRECTIONS  43 

Another  group  would  enter  the  arsenal,  the  doors  of 
which  would  be  opened  by  two  non-commissioned  offi- 
cers, and  take  possession  of  the  arms  and  ammunition, 
carrying  them  to  the  Church  of  Santa  Annunziata,  where 
all  the  guns  should  be  stored.  At  certain  places  in  the 
city  material  was  already  gathered  with  which  to  impro- 
vise barricades.  One  hundred  republicans  had  promised 
to  take  part  in  the  movement,  not  as  a  group,  but  indi- 
vidually. On  the  7th  copies  of  the  proclamation  of  the 
Italian  Committee  for  the  Social  Revolution  were  dis- 
tributed throughout  the  city,  calling  the  masses  to  arms 
and  urging  the  soldiers  to  make  common  cause  with  the 
people.  During  the  nights  of  the  7th  and  8th,  groups 
from  Bologna  assembled  at  the  appointed  places  of  meet- 
ing outside  the  walls,  but  the  Romagna  comrades  did  not 
come,  or  at  least  came  in  very  small  numbers.  Those 
from  Imola  were  surrounded  in  their  march,  some  being 
arrested  and  others  being  forced  to  retreat.  At  dawn 
the  insurgents  who  had  gathered  under  the  walls  of  Bo- 
logna dispersed,  some  taking  refuge  in  the  mountains. 
Bakounin  had  been  alone  during  the  night,  and  became 
convinced  that  the  insurrection  had  failed.  He  was  try- 
ing to  make  up  his  mind  to  commit  suicide,  when  his 
friend,  Silvio,  arrived  and  told  him  that  all  was  not  lost 
and  that  perhaps  other  attempts  might  yet  be  made.  The 
following  day  Bakounin  was  removed  to  another  retreat 
of  greater  safety,  as  numerous  arrests  had  been  made  at 
Bologna,  Imola,  Romagna,  the  Marches,  as  well  as  in 
Florence,  Rome,  and  other  parts  of  Italy. 

About  the  same  time  a  conspiracy  similar  to  that  un- 
dertaken at  Bologna  was  launched  by  Enrico  Malatesta 
and  some  friends  in  Apulia.  A  heavy  chest  of  guns  had 
been  dispatched  from  Tarentum  to  a  station  in  the  prov- 
ince of  Bari,  from  which  it  was  carried  on  a  cart  to  the 


44        VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

old  chateau  of  Castel  del  Monte,  which  had  been  chosen 
as  the  rendezvous.  "Many  hundreds  of  conspirators," 
Malatesta  recounts,  "had  promised  to  meet  at  Castel  del 
Monte.  I  arrived,  but  of  all  those  who  had  sworn  to  be 
there  we  found  ourselves  six.  No  matter.  We  opened 
the  box  of  arms  and  found  it  was  filled  with  old  per- 
cussion guns,  but  that  made  no  difference.  We  armed 
ourselves  and  declared  war  on  the  Italian  army.  We 
roamed  the  country  for  some  days,  trying  to  gain  over 
the  peasants,  but  meeting  with  no  response.  The  second 
day  we  met  eight  carabinieri,  who  opened  fire  on  us  and 
imagined  that  we  were  very  numerous.  Three  days 
later  we  discovered  that  we  were  surrounded  by  soldiers. 
There  remained  only  one  thing  to  do.  We  buried  the 
guns  and  decided  to  disperse.  I  hid  myself  in  a  load  of 
hay,  and  thus  succeeded  in  escaping  from  the  dangerous 
region."  (24)  An  attempt  at  insurrection  also  took 
place  in  Romagna,  but  it  appears  to  have 'been  limited 
to  cutting  the  telegraph  wires  between  Bologna  and 
Imola. 

Back  of  all  the  Italian  riots  lay  a  serious  economic 
condition.  The  peasants  were  in  very  deep  distress,  and 
it  was  not  difficult  for  the  Bakouninists  to  stir  them  to 
revolt.  The  Bulletin  of  the  Jura  Federation  of  August 
16  informs  us:  "During  the  last  two  years  there  have 
been  about  sixty  riots  produced  by  hunger ;  but  the  riot- 
ers, in  their  ignorance,  only  bore  a  grudge  against  the 
immediate  monopolists,  and  did  not  know  how  to  discern 
the  fundamental  causes  of  their  misery."  (25)  This  is 
all  too  plainly  shown  in  the  events  of  1874.  Beyond  giv- 
ing the  Bakouninists  a  chance  to  play  at  revolution,  there 
is  little  significance  in  the  Italian  uprisings  of  that  year. 

The  failure  of  the  various  insurrections  in  France, 
Spain,  and  Italy  was,  naturally  enough,  discouraging  to 


A  SERIES  OF  INSURRECTIONS  45 

Bakounin  and  his  followers.  The  Commune  of  Paris 
was  the  one  uprising  that  had  made  any  serious  impres- 
sion upon  the  people,  and  it  was  the  one  wherein  the 
Bakouninists  had  played  no  important  part.  The  others 
had  failed  miserably,  with  no  other  result  than  that  of 
increasing  the  power  of  reaction,  while  discouraging  and 
disorganizing  the  workers.  Even  Bakounin  had  now 
reached  the  point  where  he  was  thoroughly  disillusioned, 
and  he  wrote  to  his  friends  that  he  was  exhausted,  dis- 
heartened, and  without  hope.  He  desired,  he  said,  to  with- 
draw from  the  movement  which  made  him  the  object  of 
the  persecutions  of  the  police  and  the  calumnies  of  the 
jealous.  The  whole  world  was  in  the  evening  of  a  black 
reaction,  he  thought,  and  he  wrote  to  the  truest  and  most 
devoted  of  all  that  loyal  circle  of  Swiss  workmen,  James 
Guillaume,  that  the  time  for  revolutionary  struggles  was 
past  and  that  Europe  had  entered  into  a  period  of  pro- 
found reaction,  of  which  the  present  generation  would 
probably  not  see  the  end.  "He  urged  me,"  relates  Guil- 
laume, "to  imitate  himself  and  'to  make  my  peace  with 
the  bourgeoisie.'  "  (26)  "It  is  useless,"  are  Bakounin's 
words,  "to  wish  obstinately  to  obtain  the  impossible.  It 
is  necessary  to  recognize  reality  and  to  realize  that,  for 
the  moment,  the  popular  masses  do  not  wish  socialism. 
And,  if  some  tipplers  of  the  mountains  desire  on  this  ac- 
count to  accuse  you  of  treason,  you  will  have  for  yourself 
the  witness  of  your  conscience  and  the  esteem  of  your 
friends."  (27) 

In  July,  1873,  Bakounin  retired  to  an  estate  that  had 
been  bought  for  him  through  the  generosity  of  Cafiero, 
on  the  route  from  Locarno  to  Bellinzona,  and  for  the 
next  few  months  lavish  expenditures  were  made  in  the 
construction  and  reconstruction  of  an  establishment 
where  the  "intimates"  could  be  entertained.     That  fall 


46        VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

Bakounin  wrote  to  the  Jura  Federation,  announcing  his 
retreat  from  public  life  and  requesting  it  to  accept  his 
resignation.  "For  acting  in  this  way,"  he  wrote,  "I  have 
many  reasons.  Do  not  believe  that  it  is  principally  on 
account  of  the  personal  attacks  of  which  I  have  been 
made  the  object  these  last  years.  I  do  not  say  that  I  am 
absolutely  insensible  to  such.  However,  I  would  feel 
myself  strong  enough  to  resist  them  if  I  thought  that  my 
further  participation  in  your  work  and  in  your  struggles 
could  aid  in  the  triumph  of  the  cause  of  the  proletariat. 
But  I  do  not  think  so. 

"By  my  birth  and  my  personal  position,  and  doubtless 
by  my  sympathies  and  my  tendencies,  I  am  only  a  bour- 
geois, and,  as  such,  I  could  not  do  anything  else  among 
you  but  propaganda.  Well,  I  have  a  conviction  that  the 
time  for  great  theoretical  discourses,  whether  printed  or 
spoken,  is  past.  In  the  last  nine  years  there  have  been 
developed  within  the  International  more  ideas  than  would 
be  necessary  to  save  the  world,  if  ideas  alone  could  save 
it,  and  I  defy  anybody  to  invent  a  new  one."  (28) 

This  letter  in  reality  marks  the  end  of  Bakounin's  ac- 
tivity in  the  revolutionary  movement.  After  squandering 
most  of  Cafiero's  fortune,  Bakounin  sought  a  martyr's 
death  in  Italy,  but  in  this,  as  in  all  his  other  exploits,  he 
was  unsuccessful.  And  from  that  time  on  to  his  death 
his  life  is  a  humiliating  story  as  he  sought  here  and  there 
the  necessary  money  for  his  livelihood.  Nearly  always 
he  had  been  forced  to  live  from  hand  to  mouth.  Money, 
money,  money  was  the  burden  of  hundreds  of  his  let- 
ters. In  order  to  obtain  funds  he  had  resorted  to  almost 
every  possible  plan.  He  had  accepted  money  in  advance 
from  publishers  for  books  which  he  had  never  had  time 
to  write.  From  time  to  time  he  would  find  an  almoner  to 
care  for  him,  only  in  the  end  to  lose  him  through  his 


A  SERIES  OF  INSURRECTIONS  47 

importunate  and  exacting  demands.  An  account  is  given 
by  Guillaume  of  what  I  believe  is  the  last  meeting  be- 
tween Bakounin  and  certain  of  his  old  friends  in  Septem- 
ber, 1874.  Ross,  Cafiero,  Spichiger,  and  Guillaume  met 
Bakounin  in  a  hotel  at  Neuchatel.  Guillaume,  it  appears, 
was  cold  and  unfeeling;  Cafiero  and  Ross  said  nothing, 
while  Spichiger  wept  silently  in  a  corner.  "The  explicit 
declaration  made  by  me  .  .  .  "  says  Guillaume,  "took 
away  from  Bakounin  at  the  very  beginning  all  hope  of  a 
change  in  our  estimation  of  him.  It  was  also  a  question 
of  money  in  this  last  interview.  We  offered  to  assure  to 
our  old  friend  a  monthly  pension  of  300  francs,  express- 
ing the  hope  that  he  would  continue  to  write,  but  he  re- 
fused to  accept  anything.  As  a  set-off,  he  asked  Cafiero 
to  loan  him  3,000  francs  (no  longer  5,000),  .  .  . 
and  Cafiero  replied  that  he  would  do  it.  Then  we  sepa- 
rated sadly."  (29) 

On  the  first  of  July,  1876,  Bakounin,  after  a  brief  ill- 
ness, died  at  Bern  at  the  house  of  his  old  friend,  Dr. 
Vogt.  The  press  of  Europe  printed  various  comments 
upon  his  life  and  work.  The  anarchists  wrote  their  eulo- 
gies, while  the  socialists  generally  deplored  the  ruinous 
and  disrupting  tactics  that  Bakounin  had  employed  in  the 
International  Working  Men's  Association.  This  story 
will  be  told  later,  but  it  is  well  to  mention  here  that 
since  1869  an  unbridgeable  chasm  had  opened  itself  be- 
tween the  anarchists  and  the  socialists.  When  they  first 
came  together  in  the  International  there  was  no  clear 
distinction  between  them,  but,  after  Bakounin  was  ex- 
pelled from  that  organization  in  1872,  at  The  Hague,  his 
followers  frankly  called  themselves  anarchists,  while  the 
followers  of  Marx  called  themselves  socialists.  In  prin- 
ciples and  tactics  they  were  poles  apart,  and  the  bitter- 
ness between  them  was  at  fever  heat.      The  anarchists 


48        VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

took  the  principles  of  Bakounin  and  still  further  elabo- 
rated them,  while  his  methods  were  developed  from  con- 
spiratory  insurrections  to  individual  acts  of  violence. 
While  the  idea  of  the  Propaganda  of  the  Deed  is  to  be 
found  in  the  writings  of  Bakounin  and  Nechayeff,  it  was 
left  to  others  to  put  into  practice  that  doctrine.  For  the 
next  thirty  years  the  principles  and  ideals  of  anarchism 
made  no  appreciable  headway,  but  the  deeds  of  the  anar- 
chists became  the  talk  and,  to  a  degree,  the  terror  of 
the  world. 


CHAPTER    III 

THE  PROPAGANDA  OF  THE  DEED 

The  insurrections  in  France  and  Spain  were  on  the 
whole  spontaneous  uprisings,  but  those  disturbances  in 
Italy  in  which  the  anarchists  played  a  part  were  largely 
the  result  of  agitation.  Of  course,  adverse  political  and 
economic  conditions  were  the  chief  causes  of  that  gen- 
eral spirit  of  unrest  which  was  prevalent  in  the  early 
seventies  in  all  the  Latin  countries,  but  after  1874  the 
numerous  riots  in  which  the  anarchists  were  active  were 
almost  entirely  the  work  of  enthusiasts  who  believed  they 
could  make  revolutions.  The  results  of  the  previous  up- 
risings had  a  terribly  depressing  effect  upon  nearly  all  the 
older  men,  but  there  were  four  youths  attached  to  Ba- 
kounin's  insurrectionary  ideas  whose  spirits  were  not 
bowed  down  by  what  had  occurred.  Carlo  Cafiero,  En- 
rico Malatesta,  Paul  Brousse,  and  Prince  Kropotkin 
were  at  the  period  of  life  when  action  was  a  joyous  thing, 
and  they  undertook  to  make  history.  Cafiero  we  know  as 
a  young  Italian  of  very  wealthy  parents.  Malatesta  "had 
left  the  medical  profession  and  also  his  fortune  for  the 
sake  of  the  revolution."  (1)  Paul  Brousse  was  of 
French  parentage,  and  had  already  distinguished  himself 
in  medicine,  but  he  cast  it  aside  in  his  early  devotion  to 
anarchism.  He  had  rushed  to  Spain  when  the  revolution 
broke  out  there,  and  he  was  always  ready  to  go  where- 
ever  an  opportunity  offered  itself  for  revolutionary  activ- 
ity.   The  Russian  prince,  Kropotkin,  the  fourth  member 

49 


50        VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

of  the  group,  was  a  descendant  of  the  Ruriks,  and  it  was 
said  sometimes,  in  jest,  that  he  had  more  right  to  the 
Russian  throne  than  Czar  Alexander  II.  The  fascinating 
story  of  his  life  is  told  in  the  "Memoirs  of  a  Revolu- 
tionist," but  modesty  forbade  him  to  say  that  no  one 
since  Bakounin  has  exercised  so  great  an  influence  as 
himself  over  the  principles  and  tactics  of  anarchism. 
Kropotkin  first  visited  Switzerland  in  1872,  when  he 
came  in  close  contact  with  the  men  of  the  Jura  Federa- 
tion. A  week's  stay  with  the  Bakouninists  converted 
him,  he  says,  to  anarchism.  (2)  He  then  returned  to 
St.  Petersburg,  and  shortly  after  entered  the  famous 
circle  of  Tchaykovsky,  and,  as  a  result  of  his  revolution- 
ary activity,  he  was  arrested  and  imprisoned  in  the 
Fortress  of  St.  Peter  and  St.  Paul.  After  his  thrilling 
escape  from  prison,  in  1876,  Kropotkin  returned  to 
Switzerland,  and  for  several  years  gave  himself  up  en- 
tirely to  the  cause  of  anarchism.  These  four  young  men, 
all  far  removed  by  training  and  position  from  the  work- 
ing class,  after  the  death  of  Bakounin,  devised  the  Propa- 
ganda of  the  Deed,  a  method  of  agitation  that  was 
destined  to  become  famous  throughout  the  world. 

Hitherto  the  Bakouninists  had  all  been  firmly  con- 
vinced that  the  masses  were  ready  to  rise  at  a  moment's 
notice  in  order  to  tear  down  the  existing  governments. 
They  were  obsessed  with  the  idea  that  only  a  spark  was 
needed  to  set  the  whole  world  into  a  general  conflagra- 
tion. But  repeated  failures  taught  them  that  the  masses 
were  inclined  to  make  very  little  sacrifice  for  the  sake  of 
communism  and  that  stupendous  efforts  were  needed  to 
create  a  revolution.  It  appeared  to  them,  therefore,  that 
the  propaganda  of  words  and  of  theories  was  of  little 
avail.  Consequently,  these  four  youths,  v/ith  their 
friends,  set  out  to  spread  knowledge  by  acts  of  violence. 


THE  PROPAGANDA  OF  THE  DEED  51 

Of  course,  they  had  not  entirely  given  up  the  hope  that 
a  minority  could,  by  a  series  of  well-planned  assaults, 
gradually  sweep  in  after  them  the  masses.  But  even 
should  they  fail  in  that,  they  felt  that  they  must  strike  at 
the  enemy,  though  they  stood  alone.  Whatever  hap- 
pened, they  argued,  the  acts  themselves  would  prove  of 
great  propaganda  value.  Even  the  trials  would  enable 
them  to  use  the  courts  as  a  tribune,  and  the  bourgeois 
press  itself  would  print  their  words  and  spread  through- 
out the  world  their  doctrines. 

In  the  Bulletin  of  the  Jura  Federation,  December  3, 
1876,  Cafiero  and  Malatesta  wrote:  "The  great  majority 
of  Italian  socialists  are  grouped  about  the  program  of  the 
Italian  Federation — a  program  which  is  anarchist,  col- 
lectivism and  revolutionary.  And  the  small  number  who, 
up  to  the  present,  have  remained  on  the  outside — the 
dupes  of  intrigues  and  lies — are  all  beginning  to  enter  our 
organization.  We  do  not  refer  to  a  small  group  who,  in- 
fluenced by  personal  considerations  and  reactionary  ends, 
are  trying  to  establish  a  propaganda  which  they  call 
'gradual  and  peaceful.'  These  have  already  been  judged 
in  the  opinion  of  the  Italian  socialists  and  represent  noth- 
ing but  themselves. 

"The  Italian  Federation  believes  that  the  insurrec- 
tionary deed,  destined  to  affirm  socialist  principles  by 
acts,  is  the  most  efficacious  means  of  propaganda."  (3) 
The  next  year  Paul  Brousse  originated  the  famous 
phrase,  the  Propaganda  of  the  Deed.  He  reviews  in  the 
Bulletin  the  various  methods  of  propaganda  which  had 
previously  been  employed.  "Propaganda  from  indi- 
vidual to  individual,  propaganda  by  mass  meeting  or  con- 
ference, propaganda  by  newspaper,  pamphlet,  or  book — > 
these  means,"  he  declares,  "are  adapted  only  to  theoreti- 
cal propaganda.     Besides,  they  become  more  and  more 


52        VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

difficult  to  employ  in  any  efficacious  fashion  in  the  pres- 
ence of  those  means  possessed  by  the  bourgeoisie,  with 
its  orators,  trained  at  the  bar  and  knowing  how  to 
wheedle  the  popular  assemblies,  and  with  its  venal  press 
which  calumniates  and  disguises  everything."  (4)  In 
the  opinion  of  Brousse,  the  workers,  "laboring  most  of 
the  time  eleven  and  twelve  hours  a  day  .  .  .  return 
home  so  exhausted  by  fatigue  that  they  have  little  desire 
to  read  socialist  books  and  newspapers."  (5)  Rejecting 
thus  all  other  methods  of  propaganda,  Brousse  con- 
cludes that  "the  Propaganda  of  the  Deed  is  a  powerful 
means  of  awakening  the  popular  conscience."  (6) 

Kropotkin  was  even  more  enthusiastic  over  this  new 
method  of  education.  "A  single  deed,"  he  declared, 
"makes  more  propaganda  in  a  few  days  than  a  thousand 
pamphlets.  The  government  defends  itself,  it  rages  piti- 
lessly; but  by  this  it  only  causes  further  deeds  to  be 
committed  by  one  or  more  persons,  and  drives  the  in- 
surgents to  heroism.  One  deed  brings  forth  another; 
opponents  join  the  mutiny;  the  government  splits  into 
factions;  harshness  intensifies  the  conflict;  concessions 
come  too  late;  the  revolution  breaks  out."  (7)  Here  at 
last  is  the  famous  Propaganda  of  the  Deed,  destined  to 
such  tragic  ends.  It  owes  its  inspiration,  of  course,  to 
the  teachings  of  Bakounin,  and  we  find  among  these 
youths  the  same  contempt  for  words  and  theories  that 
Bakounin  himself  had,  and  they  proposed,  in  the  words 
of  Bakounin,  "to  destroy  something — a  person,  a  cause, 
a  condition  that  hinders  the  emancipation  of  the  peo- 
ple." (8)  Consequently,  they  undertook  immediately  to 
carry  into  effect  these  new  theories  of  propaganda,  and 
during  the  year  1877  they  organized  two  important  dem- 
onstrations, the  avowed  purpose  of  which  was  to  show 
anarchism  in  action. 


THE  PROPAGANDA  OF  THE  DEED  53 

The  first  event,  which  occurred  at  Bern,  March  18, 
under  the  leadership  of  Paul  Brousse,  was  a  manifesta- 
tion to  celebrate  the  anniversary  of  the  proclamation  of 
the  Commune.  All  the  members  of  the  Jura  Federation 
were  invited  to  take  part,  and  the  red  flag  was  to  be  un- 
furled. Among  the  most  conspicuous  in  this  demonstra- 
tion were  Brousse,  Werner,  Chopard,  Schwitzguebel, 
Kropotkin,  Pindy,  Jeallot,  Ferre,  Spichiger,  Guillaume, 
and  George  Plechanoff,  recently  arrived  from  St.  Peters- 
burg. The  participants  became  mixed  up  in  a  violent 
affray  in  the  streets,  blows  were  exchanged  between  them 
and  the  police,  but  in  the  effort  to  tear  away  the  red 
flags  many  of  the  gendarmes  were  wounded.  The  climax 
came  on  August  16  of  the  same  year,  when  twenty-five 
of  the  manifestants  appeared  before  the  correctional  tri- 
bunal of  Bern,  accused  "(1)  of  participation  in  a  brawl 
with  deadly  instruments,  (2)  of  resisting,  by  means  of 
force,  the  employees  of  the  police."  Most  of  the  pris- 
oners were  condemned  to  imprisonment,  the  terms  vary- 
ing from  ten  days  to  two  months.  James  Guillaume  was 
condemned  to  forty  days,  Brousse  to  a  month.  The  lat- 
ter and  five  other  convicted  foreigners  were  also  ban- 
ished for  three  years  from  the  canton  of  Bern.  (9) 

The  second  of  these  demonstrations  took  place  in 
April  in  the  form  of  an  insurrectionary  movement  of  the 
Internationalists  of  Italy.  They  chose  the  massive  group 
of  mountains  which  border  on  the  Province  of  Benevent 
for  the  scene  of  their  operations,  and  made  Naples  their 
headquarters.  During  the  whole  of  the  preceding  win- 
ter they  were  occupied  in  making  their  preparations,  and 
endeavoring  to  gain  the  support  of  the  peasants  of  the 
near-by  villages.  They  instructed  all  those  who  joined 
their  cause  from  Emilia,  Romagna,  and  Tuscany  to  be 
ready  for  action  the  beginning  of  April,  as  soon  as  the 


54        VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

snow  disappeared  from  the  summits  of  the  Apennines. 
According  to  information  furnished  by  Malatesta  to 
Guillaume,  on  April  6  and  7  they  journeyed  from  San 
Lupo  (Province  of  Benevent)  into  the  region  at  the  south 
of  the  Malta  Mountains  (Province  of  Caserte).  On 
the  8th  they  attacked  the  communes  of  Letino  and  Gallo, 
burned  the  archives  of  the  first  named,  pillaged  the  treas- 
ury of  the  preceptor,  and  burned  the  parish  house  of  the 
second.  On  the  9th  and  10th  they  tried  to  penetrate  the 
other  communes,  but  in  vain,  for  they  found  them  all 
occupied  by  troops  sent  directly  by  the  government  to 
oppose  them.  Their  provisions  were  exhausted,  and  they 
would  have  bought  a  fresh  supply  in  the  village  of 
Venafro,  only  the  soldiers  gave  the  alarm  and  pursued 
the  band  as  far  as  a  wood,  in  which  they  hid  themselves. 
All  of  the  nth  was  spent  in  a  long  march  through  rain 
and  snow.  The  jaded  band  was  finally  surprised  and 
captured  in  a  sheepfold,  where  they  had  sought  shelter 
for  that  night.  Two  of  the  revolutionists  escaped,  but 
were  recaptured  a  short  time  afterward.  They  were  con- 
fined in  the  prison  of  Santa-Maria  Capua  Visere,  to  the 
number  of  thirty-seven,  among  them  being  Cafiero,  Mala- 
testa, Ceccarelli,  Lazzari,  Fortini  (cure  of  Letino),  Tom- 
burri  Vincenzo  (cure  of  Gallo),  Starnari,  and  others. 
On  December  30  the  Chamber  of  Arraignment  of  Naples 
rendered  its  decision.  The  two  priests  and  a  man  who 
had  served  as  guide  to  the  insurgents  were  exempted 
from  punishment,  but  the  thirty-four  others  were  sent 
before  the  court  of  assizes  on  the  charge  of  conspiracy 
against  the  security  of  the  State.  As  these  were  politi- 
cal crimes,  which  were  covered  by  a  recent  amnesty, 
there  remained  only  the  murder  of  a  carabineer,  of  which 
the  court  of  assizes  of  Benevent  finally  acquitted  Ca- 
fiero, Malatesta,  and  their  friends  in  August,  1878.  (10) 


THE  PROPAGANDA  OF  THE  DEED  55 

By  the  above  series  of  events  the  Propaganda  of  the 
Deed  was  launched,  and  from  this  day  on  it  became  a 
recognized  method  of  propaganda.  Neither  money,  nor 
organization,  nor  literature  was  any  longer  absolutely 
necessary.  One  human  being  in  revolt  with  torch  or 
dynamite  was  able  to  instruct  the  world.  Bakounin  and 
Nechayeff  had  written  their  principles,  and  had,  in  fact, 
in  some  measure,  endeavored  to  carry  them  into  effect. 
But  the  Propaganda  of  the  Deed  was  no  more  evolved  as 
a  principle  of  action  than  these  four  daring  youths  put 
it  into  practice.  In  the  next  few  years  it  became  the  chief 
expression  of  anarchism,  and  little  by  little  it  made  the 
very  name  of  anarchism  synonymous  with  violence  and 
crime.  Surely  these  four  zealous  youths  could  hardly 
have  devised  a  method  of  propaganda  that  could  have 
served  more  completely  to  defeat  their  purpose. 

The  year  1878  witnessed  a  series  of  violent  acts  which 
brought  in  their  train  serious  consequences.  In  that  year 
an  attempt  was  made  upon  the  life  of  King  Humbert 
of  Italy;  and,  while  driving  in  Berlin  with  his  daughter, 
the  Grand  Duchess  of  Baden,  Emperor  William  was  shot 
at  by  a  half-witted  youth  named  Hodel.  Three  weeks 
later  Dr.  Karl  Nobiling  fired  at  the  Emperor  from  an 
upper  window  overlooking  the  Unter  den  Linden.  These 
assaults  were  made  to  serve  as  the  pretext  for  a  series  of 
brutally  repressive  measures  against  the  German  social- 
ists, although  the  authorities  were  unable  to  connect 
either  Hodel  or  Nobiling  with  the  anarchists  or  with  the 
socialists.  An  excellent  opportunity,  however,  had  arrived 
to  deal  a  crushing  blow  to  socialism,  and  "Bismarck  used 
his  powerful  influence  with  the  press,"  August  Bebel 
says,  "in  order  to  lash  the  public  into  a  fanatical  hatred 
of  the  social-democratic  party.  Others  who  had  an  in- 
terest in  the  defeat  of  the  party  joined  in,  especially  a 


56        VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

majority  of  the  employers.  Henceforth  our  opponents 
spoke  of  us  exclusively  as  the  party  of  assassins,  or  the 
'Ruin  all'  party— a  party  that  wished  to  rob  the  masses 
of  their  faith  in  God,  the  monarchy,  the  family,  mar- 
riage, and  property."  (n)  The  attempt  to  destroy  the 
German  socialist  organization  was  only  one  of  the  many 
repressive  measures  that  were  taken  by  the  governments 
of  Europe  in  the  midst  of  the  panic.  To  the  terrorism 
of  the  anarchists  the  governments  responded  by  a  terror- 
ism of  repression,  and  this  in  itself  helped  to  establish 
murderous  assaults  as  a  method  of  propaganda. 

Up  to  this  time  Germany  had  been  comparatively  free 
from  anarchist  teachings.  A  number  of  the  Lassalleans 
had  advocated  violent  methods.  Hasselmann  had  several 
years  before  launched  the  Red  Flag,  which  advocated 
much  that  was  not  in  harmony  with  socialism,  and  even- 
tually the  German  socialist  congress  requested  him  to 
cease  the  publication  of  his  paper.  A  few  individuals 
without  great  influence  had  endeavored  at  various  times 
to  import  Bakounin's  philosophy  and  methods  into  Ger- 
many, but  their  propaganda  bore  no  fruit  whatever.  It 
was  only  when  the  German  Government  began  to  imi- 
tate the  terrorism  of  the  Russian  bureaucracy  that  a  mo- 
mentary passion  for  retaliation  arose  among  the  social- 
ists. In  fact,  a  few  notable  socialists  went  over  to  an- 
archism, frankly  declaring  their  belief  in  terrorist  tac- 
tics. And  one  of  the  most  striking  characters  in  the 
history  of  terrorism,  Johann  Most,  was  a  product  of  Bis- 
marck's man-hunting  policies  and  legal  tyranny.  Never- 
theless, those  policies  failed  utterly  to  provoke  the  ex- 
tensive retaliation  which  Bismarck  expected,  although  it 
was  a  German  who,  after  five  attempts  had  been  made 
on  the  life  of  Czar  Alexander  II.  of  Russia — the  last  be- 
ing  successful — proposed   at  an  anarchist   congress   in 


THE  PROPAGANDA  OF  THE  DEED  57 

Paris,  in  1881,  the  forcible  removal  of  all  the  potentates 
of  the  earth.  This  was  rejected  by  the  Paris  conference 
as  "at  present  not  yet  suitable,"  (12)  although  the  idea 
proved  attractive  to  some  anarchists  who  even  believed 
that  a  few  daring  assaults  could  so  terrify  the  royal  fam- 
ilies of  Europe  that  they  would  be  forced  to  abdicate 
their  power. 

During  the  same  period  the  anarchist  movement  was 
developing  in  Austria-Hungary.  A  number  of  anarchist 
newspapers  were  launched,  and  a  ceaseless  agitation  was 
in  progress  under  the  guidance  of  Peukert,  Stellmacher, 
and  Kammerer.  Most's  Freiheit  was  smuggled  into  the 
country  in  large  quantities  and  was  read  greedily.  At  the 
trial  of  Merstallinger  it  was  shown  that  the  money  for 
anarchist  agitation  was  obtained  by  robbery.  This  dis- 
covery added  to  the  bitterness  of  the  fight  going  on  be- 
tween the  socialists  and  the  anarchists.  The  anarchists, 
however,  overpowered  their  opponents,  and  everywhere 
secret  printing  presses  were  busily  producing  incendiary 
literature  which  advocated  the  murder  of  police  officials 
and  otherwise  developed  the  tactics  of  terrorism.  "At  a 
secret  conference  at  Lang  Enzersdorf,"  says  Zenker,  "a 
new  plan  of  action  was  discussed  and  adopted,  namely,  to 
proceed  with  all  means  in  their  power  to  take  action 
against  'exploiters  and  agents  of  authority,'  to  keep  peo- 
ple in  a  state  of  continual  excitement  by  such  acts  of  ter- 
rorism, and  to  bring  about  the  revolution  in  every  possi- 
ble way.  This  program  was  immediately  acted  upon  in 
the  murder  of  several  police  agents.  On  December  15, 
1883,  at  Floridsdorf,  a  police  official  named  Hlubek  was 
murdered,  and  the  condemnation  of  Rouget,  who  was 
convicted  of  the  crime,  on  June  23,  1884,  was  imme- 
diately answered  the  next  day  by  the  murder  of  the  po- 
lice agent  Bloct.     The  Government  now  took  energetic 


58        VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

measures.  By  order  of  the  Ministry,  a  state  of  siege  was 
proclaimed  in  Vienna  and  district  from  January  30,  1884, 
by  which  the  usual  tribunals  for  certain  crimes  and 
offences  were  temporarily  suspended,  and  the  severest 
repressive  measures  were  exercised  against  the  anar- 
chists, so  that  anarchism  in  Austria  rapidly  declined,  and 
at  the  same  time  it  soon  lost  its  leaders.  Stellmacher  and 
Kammerer  were  executed,  Peukert  escaped  to  England, 
most  of  the  other  agitators  were  fast  in  prison,  the  jour- 
nals were  suppressed  and  the  groups  broken  up."  (13) 

While  these  events  were  taking  place  in  Austria,  anar- 
chist agitation  was  manifesting  itself  in  several  great 
strikes  that  broke  out  in  the  industrial  centers  of  South- 
ern France.  At  Lyons,  Fournier,  who  shot  his  employer 
in  the  open  street,  was  honored  in  a  public  meeting  by  the 
presentation  of  a  revolver.  A  great  demonstration  was 
planned  for  Paris,  but,  as  there  happened  to  be  a  review 
of  troops  on  the  day  set,  the  anarchists  decided  to  aban- 
don the  demonstration.  In  the  autumn  of  the  same  year 
(1882),  troubles  arose  in  Monceau-les-Mines  and  at 
Blanzy,  where  the  workers  were  bent  under  a  terrible 
capitalist  and  clerical  domination.  Under  the  circum- 
stances, the  anarchist  propaganda  was  very  welcome,  and 
it  was  only  a  short  time  until  it  produced  an  anti-religious 
demonstration.  Three  or  four  hundred  men,  armed  with 
pitchforks  and  revolvers,  spread  over  the  country,  break- 
ing the  crosses  and  the  statues  of  the  Virgin  which 
were  placed  at  the  junctions  of  the  roads.  They  called 
the  working  classes  to  arms  and  took  as  hostages  land- 
lords, cures,  and  functionaries.  These  riots  were  the 
childlike  manifestations  of  exasperated  and  miserable 
men,  destined  in  advance  to  failure.  Numerous  arrests 
followed,  and  in  the  mines  the  workers  suffered  increased 
oppression. 


THE  PROPAGANDA  OF  THE  DEED  59 

In  1882  the  great  silk  industry  of  Lyons  was  undergo- 
ing a  serious  crisis,  and  the  misery  among  the  weavers 
was  intense.  The  anarchists  were  carrying  on  a  big  agi- 
tation led  by  Kropotkin,  Gautier,  Bordas,  Bernard,  and 
others.  In  the  center  of  this  city  reduced  almost  to 
starvation  there  was,  says  Kropotkin,  an  "underground 
cafe  at  the  Theatre  Bellecour,  which  remained  open  all 
night,  and  where,  in  the  small  hours  of  the  morning,  one 
could  see  newspaper  men  and  politicians  feasting  and 
drinking  in  company  with  gay  women.  Not  a  meeting 
was  held  but  some  menacing  allusion  was  made  to  that 
cafe,  and  one  night  a  dynamite  cartridge  was  exploded 
in  it  by  an  unknown  hand.  A  worker  who  was  occa- 
sionally there,  a  socialist,  jumped  to  blow  out  the  lighted 
fuse  of  the  cartridge,  and  was  killed,  while  a  few  of  the 
feasting  politicians  were  slightly  wounded.  Next  day  a 
dynamite  cartridge  was  exploded  at  the  doors  of  a  re- 
cruiting bureau,  and  it  was  said  that  the  anarchists  in- 
tended to  blow  up  the  huge  statue  of  the  Virgin  which 
stands  on  one  of  the  hills  of  Lyons."  (14)  A  panic 
seized  the  wealthier  classes  of  the  city,  and  some  sixty 
anarchists  were  arrested,  including  Kropotkin.  A  great 
trial,  known  as  the  Proces  des  Anarchistes  de  Lyons,  en- 
sued, which  lasted  many  weeks.  At  the  conclusion  only 
three  out  of  the  entire  number  were  acquitted.  Although 
nearly  all  the  anarchists  were  condemned,  the  police  of 
Lyons  were  still  searching  for  the  author  of  the  explo- 
sion. At  last,  Cyvoct,  a  militant  anarchist  of  Lyons,  was 
identified  as  the  one  who  had  thrown  the  bomb.  Cyvoct 
had  first  gone  to  Switzerland,  then  to  Brussels,  in  the 
suburbs  of  which  city  he  was  finally  arrested.  He  was 
given  over  to  the  French  police,  appeared  before  the 
court  of  assizes  of  the  Rhone,  and  was  condemned  to 


60         VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

death.    His  sentence  was  afterward  commuted  to  that  of 
enforced  labor,  and  in  1897  he  was  pardoned. 

On  March  29,  1883,  the  carpenters'  union  of  Paris 
called  the  unemployed  to  a  meeting  to  be  held  on  the 
Esplanade  des  Invalides.  Two  groups  of  anarchists 
formed.  One  started  toward  the  £lysee  and  was  scat- 
tered on  its  way  by  the  police.  The  second  went  toward 
the  suburb  of  Saint-Antoine.  On  the  march  many  baker- 
ies were  robbed  by  the  manifestants.  Arrived  at  Place 
Maubert,  they  clashed  with  a  large  force  of  police.  As 
a  result,  many  arrests  were  made.  Accused  of  inciting 
to  pillage,  Louise  Michel  and  Emile  Pouget  were  con- 
demned to  several  years'  imprisonment.  The  same 
month,  at  Monceau-les-Mines  and  in  Paris,  great  dem- 
onstrations of  the  "unemployed"  took  place  in  the  streets, 
combined  with  robbery  and  dynamite  outrages,  while  in 
July  there  were  sanguinary  encounters  with  the  armed 
forces  in  Roubaix  and  elsewhere.  Again  and  again  the 
populace  was  incited  to  rise  against  the  bourgeoisie, 
"who  (it  was  said)  were  indulging  in  festivities  while 
they  had  condemned  Louise  Michel,  the  champion  of  the 
proletariat,  to  a  cruel  imprisonment."  (15) 

These  are  but  a  few  instances  of  the  activity  of  the 
anarchists  at  the  end  of  the  seventies  and  at  the  begin- 
ning of  the  eighties.  They  are  perhaps  sufficient  to  show 
that  the  Propaganda  of  the  Deed  was  making  headway 
in  Western  Europe.  Certainly  in  Germany  and  Austria 
its  course  was  soon  run,  but  in  France,  Italy,  Spain,  and 
even  in  Belgium  every  strike  was  attended  with  violence. 
Insurrections,  dynamite  outrages,  assassinations — all 
played  their  part.  At  the  same  time  the  governments 
carried  on  a  ferocious  persecution,  and  the  chief  anar- 
chists were  driven  from  place  to  place  and  hunted  as 
wild    animals.      Police   spies    and    agents   provocateurs 


THE  PROPAGANDA  OF  THE  DEED  6l 

swarmed  over  the  labor,  socialist,  and  anarchist  move- 
ments, and  at  the  slightest  sign  of  an  uprising  the  sol- 
diers were  brought  out  to  shoot  down  the  people.  Hardly 
a  month  went  by  without  some  "anarchist  trouble,"  and 
many  harmless  strikes  resulted  in  dreadful  massacres. 
It  was  a  tragic  period,  that  reminds  one  again  of  the  pic- 
ture in  Dante  in  which  the  two  bitter  enemies  inflict 
upon  each  other  cruel  wounds  in  a  fight  that  on  both 
sides  was  inspired  by  the  deepest  hatred. 


CHAPTER   IV 

JOHANN  MOST  IN  AMERICA 

While  the  above  events  were  transpiring  in  the  Latin 
countries,  the  Bakouninists  were  keeping  a  sharp  eye 
on  America  as  a  land  of  hopeful  possibilities.  As  early 
as  1874  Bakounin  himself  considered  the  matter  of  com- 
ing here,  while  Kropotkin  and  Guillaume  followed  with 
interest  the  labor  disturbances  that  were  at  that  time  so 
numerous  and  so  violent  in  this  country.  The  panic  of 
1873  had  caused  widespread  suffering  among  the  working 
classes.  For  several  years  afterward  hordes  of  unem- 
ployed tramped  the  country.  The  masses  were  driven 
to  desperation  and,  in  their  hunger,  to  frequent  out- 
breaks of  violence.  When  later  a  measure  of  prosperity 
returned,  both  the  trade-union  and  the  socialist  move- 
ments began  to  attract  multitudes  of  the  discontented. 
The  news  of  two  important  events  in  the  labor  world  of 
America  reached  the  anarchists  of  the  Jura  and  filled 
them,  Guillaume  says,  "with  a  lively  emotion."  In  June, 
1877,  Kropotkin  called  attention  to  the  act  of  the  Su- 
preme Court  of  the  United  States  in  declaring  unconsti- 
tutional the  eight-hour  law  on  Government  work.  He 
was  especially  pleased  with  an  article  in  the  Labor  Stand- 
ard of  New  York,  which  declared :  "This  will  teach  the 
workers  not  to  put  their  confidence  in  Congress  and  to 
trust  only  in  their  own  efforts.  No  law  of  Congress 
could  be  of  any  use  to  the  worker  if  he  is  not  so  organ- 
ized that  he  can  enforce  it.     And,  if  the  workers  are 

62 


JOHANN  MOST  IN  AMERICA  63 

strong  enough  to  do  that,  if  they  succeed  in  solidly  form- 
ing the  federation  of  their  trade  organizations,  then  they 
will  be  able,  not  only  to  force  the  legislators  to  make 
efficacious  laws  on  the  hours  of  work,  on  inspection,  etc., 
but  they  will  also  be  able  to  make  the  law  themselves, 
deciding  that  henceforth  no  worker  in  the  country  shall 
work  more  than  eight  hours  a  day."  "It  is  the  good, 
practical  sense  of  an  American  which  says  that,"  (1) 
comments  Kropotkin.  This  act  of  the  Supreme  Court 
and  this  statement  of  the  Labor  Standard  were  very  wel- 
come news  to  the  anarchists.  They  were  convinced  that 
the  Americans  had  abandoned  political  action  and  were 
turning  to  what  they  had  already  begun  to  call  "direct 
action." 

Another  event,  a  month  later,  added  to  this  conviction. 
In  its  issue  of  July  29  the  Bulletin  published  this  article : 
"  'Following  a  strike  of  the  machinists  of  the  Baltimore 
&  Ohio  Railroad,  a  popular  insurrection  has  burst  forth 
in  the  states  of  Maryland,  West  Virginia,  Pennsylvania, 
and  Ohio.  If  at  Martinsburg  (West  Virginia)  the  work- 
men have  been  conquered  by  the  militia,  at  Baltimore 
(Maryland),  a  city  of  300,000  inhabitants,  they  have 
been  victorious.  They  have  taken  possession  of  the  sta- 
tion and  have  burned  it,  together  with  all  the  wagons  of 
petroleum  which  were  there.  At  Pittsburgh  (Pennsyl- 
vania), a  city  of  100,000  inhabitants,  the  workers  are  at 
the  present  time  masters  of  the  city,  after  having  seized 
guns  and  cannon.  .  .  .  The  strike  is  extending  to  the 
near-by  railroads  and  is  gaining  in  the  direction  of  the 
Pacific.  Great  agitation  reigns  in  New  York.  It  is  an- 
nounced that  the  troops  will  concentrate,  that  Sheridan 
has  been  named  commander,  and  that  the  Western  States 
have  offered  their  help.'  In  the  following  number,  a  de- 
tailed article,  written  by  Kropotkin,  recounted  the  de- 


64        VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

nouement  of  the  crisis,  the  recovery  of  Pittsburgh,  where 
two  thousand  wagons  loaded  with  merchandise  had  been 
burned,  the  repression  and  the  disarray  of  the  strikers 
following  the  treachery  of  the  miserable  false  brothers, 
and  the  final  miscarriage  of  the  movement.  But  if  there 
had  been,  in  this  attempt  of  popular  insurrection,  weak 
sides  that  had  brought  about  the  failure,  Kropotkin 
rightly  praised  the  qualities  of  which  the  American  work- 
ing people  had  just  given  proof :  'This  movement  will 
have  certainly  impressed  profoundly  the  proletariat  of 
Europe  and  excited  its  admiration.  Its  spontaneity,  its 
simultaneousness  at  so  many  distant  points  communicat- 
ing only  by  telegraph,  the  aid  given  by  the  workers  of 
different  trades,  the  resolute  character  of  the  uprising 
from  the  beginning,  call  forth  all  our  sympathies,  excite 
our  admiration,  and  awaken  our  hopes.  .  .  .  But  the 
blood  of  our  brothers  of  America  shall  not  have  flowed  in 
vain.  Their  energy,  their  union  in  action,  their  courage 
Will  serve  as  an  example  to  the  proletariat  of  Europe. 
But  would  that  this  flowing  of  noble  blood  prove  once 
again  the  blindness  of  those  who  amuse  the  people  with 
the  plaything  of  parliamentarism  when  the  powder  maga- 
zine is  ready  to  take  fire,  unknown  to  them,  at  the  fall 
of  the  least  spark.'  "  (2) 

The  news  of  industrial  troubles,  such  as  the  above, 
convinced  the  anarchist  elements  of  Europe  that  Amer- 
ica was  ripe  for  direct  action  and  the  revolution.  And 
it  was  indeed  this  period  of  profound  industrial  unrest 
that  gave  a  forward  impulse  to  all  radical  movements  in 
the  late  seventies.  Socialist  newspapers  sprang  up  in  all 
parts  of  the  country,  and  both  socialist  and  trade-union 
organizations  took  on  an  immense  development.  Riots, 
minor  insurrections,  and  strikes  were  symptoms  of  an 
all-pervading  discontent.    Simultaneously  with  this,  many 


JOHANN  MOST  IN  AMERICA  65 

revolutionists,  upon  being  expelled  from  Germany,  were 
injected  into  the  ferment.  With  many  other  refugees, 
the  Germans  then  began  to  form  revolutionary  clubs,  and, 
in  1882,  Johann  Most  appeared  in  the  United  States 
scattering  broadcast  the  terrorist  ideas  of  Bakounin  and 
Nechayeff. 

Most  was  perhaps  the  most  fiery  personality  that  ap- 
peared in  the  ranks  of  the  anarchists  after  the  death  of 
Bakounin.  A  cruel  stepmother,  a  pitiless  employer,  a  long 
sickness,  and  an  operation  which  left  his  face  deformed 
forever  are  some  of  the  incidents  of  his  unhappy  child- 
hood. He  received  a  poor  education,  but  read  exten- 
sively, and  as  a  bookbinder  worked  at  his  trade  in  Ger- 
many, Austria,  Italy,  and  Switzerland.  He  became  at- 
tached to  the  labor  movement  toward  the  end  of  the  six- 
ties, and  was  elected  to  the  German  Reichstag  in  1874. 
Forced  to  leave  Germany  as  a  result  of  the  anti-socialist 
law,  he  went  to  London,  where  he  established  Die  Frei- 
heit,  at  first  a  social-democratic  paper,  which  was  smug- 
gled into  Germany.  He  became,  however,  more  and 
more  violent,  and  in  1880,  at  a  secret  gathering  of  the 
German  socialists  at  Wyden  in  Switzerland,  he  and  his 
friend  Hasselmann  were  expelled  from  the  Germany 
party.  After  this  he  no  longer  attempted  to  conceal  his 
anarchist  sympathies,  and  in  the  Freiheit,  on  the  plat- 
form, and  on  every  possible  occasion  he  preached  prin- 
ciples almost  identical  with  those  of  Nechayeff  and 
Bakounin.  In  a  pamphlet  on  the  scientific  art  of  revolu- 
tionary warfare  and  of  dynamiters  he  prescribes  in  de- 
tail where  bombs  should  be  placed  in  churches,  palaces, 
and  ball-rooms.*  He  advises  wholly  individual  action, 
in  order  that  the  groups  may  suffer  as  little  harm  as  pos- 
sible.   His  pamphlet  also  contains  a  dictionary  of  poisons 

*  See  Revolntion'dre  Kriegswissenschaft. 


66        VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

which  may  be  usefully  employed  against  politicians, 
traitors,  and  spies.  "Extirpate  the  miserable  brood!"  he 
writes  in  Die  Freiheit;  "extirpate  the  wretches !  Thus 
runs  the  refrain  of  a  revolutionary  song  of  the  working 
classes,  and  this  will  be  the  exclamation  of  the  executive 
of  a  victorious  proletariat  army  when  the  battle  has  been 
won.  For  at  the  critical  moment  the  executioner's  block 
must  ever  be  before  the  eyes  of  the  revolutionist. 
Either  he  is  cutting  off  the  heads  of  his  enemies  or  his 
own  is  being  cut  off.  Science  gives  us  means  which 
make  it  possible  to  accomplish  the  wholesale  destruction 
of  these  beasts  quietly  and  deliberately."  Elsewhere  he 
says,  "Those  of  the  reptile  brood  who  are  not  put  to 
the  sword  remain  as  a  thorn  in  the  flesh  of  the  new  so- 
ciety ;  hence  it  would  be  both  foolish  and  criminal  not  to 
annihilate  utterly  this  race  of  parasites."  (3) 

It  was  this  cheerful  individual  who,  after  being  ex- 
pelled from  the  German  socialist  party,  made  prodigious 
efforts  to  establish  revolutionary  organizations  all  over 
Europe.  In  London  he  captured  the  Communist  Work- 
ing Men's  Educational  "Society,  despite  the  protest  of  a 
considerable  minority,  and  through  it  he  undertook  to 
launch  other  revolutionary  clubs.  The  parliamentary  so- 
cialists were  bitterly  assailed,  and  a  congress  was  held  in 
Paris  and  a  later  one  in  London  for  the  purpose  of  unit- 
ing the  revolutionists  of  all  countries.  According  to 
Zenker,  the  headquarters  of  the  association  were  at  Lon- 
don, and  sub-committees  were  formed  to  act  in  Paris, 
Geneva,  and  New  York.  Money  was  to  be  collected  "for 
the  purchase  of  poison  and  weapons,  as  well  as  to  find 
places  suitable  for  laying  mines,  and  so  on.  To  attain  the 
proposed  end,  the  annihilation  of  all  rulers,  ministers  of 
State,  nobility,  the  clergy,  the  most  prominent  capital- 
ists, and  other  exploiters,  any  means  are  permissible,  and 


JOHANN  MOST  IN  AMERICA  67 

therefore  great  attention  should  be  given  specially  to  the 
study  of  chemistry  and  the  preparation  of  explosives,  as 
being  the  most  important  weapons.  Together  with  the 
chief  committee  in  London  there  will  also  be  established 
an  executive  bureau,  whose  duty  is  to  carry  out  the  de- 
cisions of  the  chief  committee  and  to  conduct  corre- 
spondence." (4) 

After  these  attempts  to  establish  an  anarchist  Inter- 
national, Most  sailed  for  New  York.  Some  of  his  ideas 
had  preceded  him,  and  when  he  arrived  he  was  met  and 
greeted  by  masses  of  German  workingmen.  Miss  Emma 
Goldman,  in  "Anarchism  and  Other  Essays,"  tells  us  of 
the  impression  he  made  upon  her.  "Some  twenty-one 
years  ago,"  she  says,  "I  heard  the  first  great  anarchist 
speaker — the  inimitable  John  Most.  It  seemed  to  me 
then,  and  for  many  years  after,  that  the  spoken  word 
hurled  forth  among  the  masses  with  such  wonderful  elo- 
quence, such  entlmsiasm  and  fire,  could  never  be  erased 
from  the  human  mind  and  soul.  How  could  any  one 
of  all  the  multitudes  who  flocked  to  Most's  meetings  es- 
cape his  prophetic  voice!"  (5)  At  the  time  of 
Most's  arrival  the  American  socialist  movement  was 
hopelessly  divided  over  questions  of  methods  and 
tactics.  Already  there  had  been  bitter  quarrels  be- 
tween those  in  the  movement  who  had  formed  se- 
cret drilling  organizations  which  were  preparing  for  a 
violent  revolution,  and  those  others  who  sought  by  edu- 
cation, organization,  and  political  action  to  achieve  their 
demands.  In  the  year  1880  a  number  of  New  York 
members  had  left  the  socialist  organization  and  formed 
a  revolutionary  group,  and  in  October  of  the  following 
year  a  convention  was  held  to  organize  the  various  revo- 
lutionary groups  into  a  national  organization.  Every- 
thing was  favorable  for  Most,  and  when  he  arrived  it 


68        VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

was  not  long,  with  his  magnetic  personality  and  fiery  agi- 
tation, until  he  had  swept  out  of  existence  the  older  so- 
cialist organizations.  In  1883  representatives  from 
twenty-six  cities  met  in  Pittsburgh  to  form  the  revolu- 
tionary socialist  and  anarchist  groups  into  one  body, 
called  the  "International  Working  People's  Association." 
The  same  year  a  dismal  socialist  convention  was  held  in 
Baltimore  with  only  sixteen  delegates  attending.  They 
attempted  to  stem  the  tide  to  terrorism  by  declaring: 
"We  do  not  share  the  folly  of  the  men  who  consider 
dynamite  bombs  as  the  best  means  of  agitation.  We 
know  full  well  that  a  revolution  must  take  place  in  the 
heads  and  in  the  industrial  life  of  men  before  the  work- 
ing class  can  achieve  lasting  success."  (6) 

The  tide,  however,  was  not  stayed.  The  advocates  of 
direct  action  continued  headlong  toward  the  bitter  climax 
at  the  Haymarket  in  Chicago  in  1886.  Just  previous  to 
that  fatal  catastrophe,  a  series  of  great  strikes  had  oc- 
curred in  and  about  that  city.  At  the  McCormick 
Reaper  Works  a  crowd  of  men  was  being  addressed  by 
Spies,  an  anarchist,  when  the  "scabs"  left  the  factory. 
A  pitched  battle  ensued.  The  police  were  called,  and, 
when  they  were  assaulted  with  stones,  they  opened  fire 
on  the  crowd,  shooting  indiscriminately  men,  women, 
and  children,  killing  six  and  wounding  many  more. 
Spies,  full  of  rage,  hurried  to  the  office  of  Arbeiter  Zei- 
tung,  the  anarchist  paper,  and  composed  the  proclama- 
tion to  the  workingmen  of  Chicago  which  has  since  be- 
come famous  as  "the  revenge  circular."  It  called  upon 
the  workingmen  to  arm  themselves  and  to  avenge  the 
brutal  murder  of  their  brothers.  Five  thousand  copies 
of  the  circular,  printed  in  English  and  German,  were 
distributed  in  the  streets.  The  next  evening,  May  4, 
1886,  a  mass  meeting  was  called   at  the   Haymarket. 


JOHANN  MOST  IN  AMERICA  69 

About  two  thousand  working  people  attended  the  meet- 
ing. The  mayor  of  the  city  went  in  person  to  hear  the 
addresses,  and  later  testified  that  he  had  reported  to  Cap- 
tain Bonfield,  at  the  nearest  police  station,  that  "nothing 
had  occurred  nor  was  likely  to  occur  to  require  inter- 
ference." Nevertheless,  after  Mayor  Harrison  had  gone, 
Captain  Bonfield  sent  one  hundred  and  seventy-six  po- 
licemen to  march  upon  the  little  crowd  that  remained. 
Captain  Ward,  the  officer  in  charge,  commanded  the 
meeting  to  disperse,  and,  as  Fielden,  one  of  the  speakers, 
retorted  that  the  meeting  was  a  peaceable  one,  a  dyna- 
mite bomb  was  thrown  from  an  adjoining  alley  that 
killed  several  policemen  and  wounded  many  more. 

In  the  agitation  that  led  up  to  the  Haymarket  tragedy, 
dynamite  had  always  been  glorified  as  the  poor  man's 
weapon.  It  was  the  power  that  science  had  given  to  the 
weak  to  protect  them  from  injustice  and  tyranny.  As 
powder  and  the  musket  had  destroyed  feudalism,  so 
dynamite  would  destroy  capitalism.  In  the  issue  of  the 
Freiheit,  March  18,  1883,  Most  printed  an  article  called 
"Revolutionary  Principles."  Many  of  the  phrases  are 
evidently  taken  from  the  "Catechism"  of  Bakounin  and 
Nechayeff,  and  the  sentiments  are  identical.  During  all 
this  period  great  meetings  were  organized  to  glorify  some 
martyr  who,  by  the  Propaganda  of  the  Deed,  had  com- 
mitted some  great  crime.  For  instance,  vast  meetings 
were  organized  in  honor  of  Stellmacher  and  others  who 
had  murdered  officers  of  the  Viennese  police.  At  one  of 
these  meetings  Most  declared  that  such  acts  should  not 
be  called  murder,  because  "murder  is  the  killing  of  a 
human  being,  and  I  have  never  heard  that  a  policeman 
was  a  human  being."  (7)  When  August  Reinsdorf  was 
executed  for  an  attempt  on  the  life  of  the  German  Em- 
peror, Most's  Freiheit  appeared  with  a  heavy  black  bor- 


1fc 


70        VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

der.  "One  of  our  noblest  and  best  is  no  more,"  he  la- 
ments. "In  the  prison  yard  at  Halle  under  the  murder- 
ous sword  of  the  criminal  Hohenzollern  band,  on  the  7th 
of  February,  August  Reinsdorf  ended  a  life  full  of  bat- 
tle and  of  self-sacrificing-  courage,  as  a  martyr  to  the 
great  revolution."  (8)  It  was  inevitable  that  such  views 
should  lead  sooner  or  later  to  a  tragedy,  and,  while  most 
of  the  Chicago  anarchists  were  plain  workingmen,  simple 
and  kindly,  at  least  one  fanatic  in  the  group  deserves  to 
rank  with  Nechayeff  and  Most  as  an  irreconcilable  enemy 
of  the  existing  order.  This  was  Louis  Lingg,  whose  last 
words  as  he  was  taken  from  the  court  were:  "I  re- 
peat that  I  am  the  enemy  of  the  'order'  of  to-day,  and  I 
repeat  that,  with  all  my  powers,  so  long  as  breath  re- 
mains in  me,  I  shall  combat  it.  I  declare  again,  frankly 
and  openly,  that  I  am  in  favor  of  using  force.  I  have 
told  Captain  Schaack,  and  I  stand  by  it,  'If  you  can- 
nonade us,  we  shall  dynamite  you.'  You  laugh !  Per- 
haps you  think,  'You'll  throw  no  more  bombs';  but  let 
me  assure  you  that  I  die  happy  on  the  gallows,  so  confi- 
dent am  I  that  the  hundreds  and  thousands  to  whom  I 
have  spoken  will  remember  my  words;  and,  when  you 
shall  have  hanged  us,  then,  mark  my  words,  they  will  do 
the  bomb-throwing !  In  this  hope  I  say  to  you :  I  de- 
spise you.  I  despise  your  order,  your  laws,  your  force- 
propped  authority.    Hang  me  for  it!"  (9) 

There  are  many  minor  incidents  now  quite  forgotten 
that  played  a  part  in  this  American  terrorism.  Benjamin 
R.  Tucker,  of  New  York,  himself  an  anarchist,  but  not 
an  advocate  of  terrorist  tactics,  had  in  the  midst  of  this 
period  to  cry  out  in  protest  against  the  acts  of  those  who 
called  themselves  anarchists.  In  his  paper,  Liberty, 
March  27,  1886,  Tucker  wrote  on  "The  Beast  of  Com- 
munism." (10)     He  began  by  quoting  Henri  Rochefort, 


JOHANN  MOST  IN  AMERICA  71 

who  was  reported  to  have  said :  "Anarchists  are  merely 
criminals.  They  are  robbers.  They  want  no  govern- 
ment whatever,  so  that,  when  they  meet  you  on  the  street, 
they  can  knock  you  down  and  rob  you."  (n) 

"This  infamous  and  libelous  charge,"  says  Tucker,  "is 
a  very  sweeping  one;  I  only  wish  that  I  could  honestly 
meet  it  with  as  sweeping  a  denial.  And  I  can,  if  I  re- 
strict the  word  anarchist  as  it  always  has  been  restricted 
in  these  columns,  and  as  it  ought  to  be  restricted  every- 
where and  always.  Confining  the  word  anarchist  so  as 
to  include  none  but  those  who  deny  all  external  authority 
over  the  individual,  whether  that  of  the  present  State  or 
that  of  some  industrial  collectivity  or  commune  which 
the  future  may  produce,  I  can  look  Henri  Rochefort  in 
the  face  and  say:  'You  lie!'  For  of  all  these  men  I  do 
not  recall  even  one  who,  in  any  ordinary  sense  of  the 
term,  can  be  justly  styled  a  robber. 

"But  unfortunately,  in  the  minds  of  the  people  at  large, 
this  word  anarchist  is  not  yet  thus  restricted  in  meaning. 
This  is  due  principally  to  the  fact  that  within  a  few 
years  the  word  has  been  usurped,  in  the  face  of  all  logic 
and  consistency,  by  a  party  of  communists  who  believe 
in  a  tyranny  worse  than  any  that  now  exists,  who  deny 
to  the  laborer  the  individual  possession  of  his  product, 
and  who  preach  to  their  followers  the  following  doctrine : 
'Private  property  is  your  enemy ;  it  is  the  beast  that  is 
devouring  you ;  all  wealth  belongs  to  everybody ;  take  it 
wherever  you  can  find  it ;  have  no  scruples  about  the 
means  of  taking  it ;  use  dynamite,  the  dagger,  or  the  torch 
to  take  it ;  kill  innocent  people  to  take  it ;  but,  at  all  events, 
take  it.'  This  is  the  doctrine  which  they  call  anarchy, 
and  this  policy  they  dignify  with  the  name  of  'propa- 
gandism  by  deed.' 

"Well,  it  has  borne  fruit  with  most  horrible  fecundity. 


j2        VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

To  be  sure,  it  has  gained  a  large  mass  of  adherents,  espe- 
cially in  the  Western  cities,  who  are  well-meaning  men 
and  women,  not  yet  become  base  enough  to  practice  the 
theories  which  they  profess  to  have  adopted.  But  it  has 
also  developed,  and  among  its  immediate  and  foremost 
supporters,  a  gang  of  criminals  whose  deeds  for  the  past 
two  years  rival  in  'pure  cussedness'  any  to  be  found  in 
the  history  of  crime.  Were  it  not,  therefore,  that  I  have 
first,  last,  and  always  repudiated  these  pseudo-anarchists 
and  their  theories,  I  should  hang  my  head  in  shame  be- 
fore Rochefort's  charge  at  having  to  confess  that  too 
many  of  them  are  not  only  robbers,  but  incendiaries  and 
murderers.  But,  knowing  as  I  do  that  no  real  anarchist 
has  any  part  or  lot  in  these  infamies,  I  do  not  confess  the 
facts  with  shame,  but  reiterate  them  with  righteous  wrath 
and  indignation,  in  the  interest  of  my  cause,  for  the  pro- 
tection of  its  friends,  and  to  save  the  lives  and  posses- 
sions of  any  more  weak  and  innocent  persons  from  being 
wantonly  destroyed  or  stolen  by  cold-blooded  villains 
parading  in  the  mask  of  reform. 

"Yes,  the  time  has  come  to  speak.  It  is  even  well-nigh 
too  late.  Within  the  past  fortnight  a  young  mother  and 
her  baby  boy  have  been  burned  to  death  under  circum- 
stances which  suggest  to  me  the  possibility  that,  had  I 
made  this  statement  sooner,  their  lives  would  have  been 
saved ;  and,  as  I  now  write  these  lines,  I  fairly  shudder  at 
the  thought  that  they  may  not  reach  the  public  and  the 
interested  parties  before  some  new  holocaust  has  added 
to  the  number  of  those  who  have  already  fallen  victims. 
Others  who  know  the  facts,  well-meaning  editors  of  lead- 
ing journals  of  so-called  communistic  anarchism,  may, 
from  a  sense  of  mistaken  party  fealty,  bear  longer  the 
fearful  responsibility  of  silence,  if  they  will ;  for  one  T 
will  not,  cannot.     I  will  take  the  other  responsibility  of 


JOHANN  MOST  IN  AMERICA  73 

exposure,  which  responsibility  I  personally  and  entirely 
assume,  although  the  step  is  taken  after  conference  upon 
its  wisdom  with  some  of  the  most  trusted  and  active 
anarchists  in  America. 

"Now,  then,  the  facts.  And  they  are  facts,  though  I 
state  them  generally,  without  names,  dates,  or  details. 

"The  main  fact  is  this :  that  for  nearly  two  years  a 
large  number  of  the  most  active  members  of  the  Ger- 
man Group  of  the  International  Working  People's  As- 
socation  in  New  York  City,  and  of  the  Social  Revolution- 
ary Club,  another  German  organization  in  that  city,  have 
been  persistently  engaged  in  getting  money  by  insuring 
their  property  for  amounts  far  in  excess  of  the  real 
value  thereof,  secretly  removing  everything  that  they 
could,  setting  fire  to  the  premises,  swearing  to  heavy 
losses,  and  exacting  corresponding  sums  from  the  insur- 
ance companies.  Explosion  of  kerosene  lamps  is  usually 
the  device  which  they  employ.  Some  seven  or  eight  fires, 
at  least,  of  this  sort  were  set  in  New  York  and  Brooklyn 
in  1884  by  members  of  the  gang,  netting  the  beneficiaries 
an  aggregate  profit  of  thousands  of  dollars.  In  1885 
nearly  twenty  more  were  set,  with  equally  profitable  re- 
sults. The  record  for  1886  has  reached  six  already,  if 
not  more.  The  business  has  been  carried  on  with  the 
most  astonishing  audacity.  One  of  these  men  had  his 
premises  insured,  fired  them,  and  presented  his  bill  of 
loss  to  the  company  within  twenty-four  hours  after  get- 
ting his  policy,  and  before  the  agent  had  reported  the  pol- 
icy to  the  company.  The  bill  was  paid,  and  a  few  months 
later  the  same  fellow,  under  another  name,  played  the 
game  over  again,  though  not  quite  so  speedily.  In  one 
of  the  fires  set  in  1885  a  woman  and  two  children  were 
burned  to  death.  The  two  guilty  parties  in  this  case 
were  members  of  the  Bohemian  Group  and  are  now  serv- 


74        VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

ing  life  sentences  in  prison.  Another  of  the  fires  was 
started  in  a  six-story  tenement  house,  endangering  the 
lives  of  hundreds,  but  fortunately  injuring  no  one  but 
the  incendiary.  In  one  case  in  1886  the  firemen  have 
saved  two  women  whom  they  found  clinging  to  their 
bed  posts  in  a  half-suffocated  condition.  In  another  a 
man,  woman,  and  baby  lost  their  lives.  Three  members 
of  the  gang  are  now  in  jail  awaiting  trial  for  murdering 
and  robbing  an  old  woman  in  Jersey  City.  Two  others 
are  in  jail  under  heavy  bail  and  awaiting  trial  for  carry- 
ing concealed  weapons  and  assaulting  an  officer.  They 
were  walking  arsenals,  and  were  found  under  circum- 
stances which  lead  to  the  suspicion  that  they  were  about 
to  perpetrate  a  robbery,  if  not  a  murder. 

"The  profits  accruing  from  this  'propagandism  by 
deed'  are  not  even  used  for  the  benefit  of  the  movement 
to  which  the  criminals  belong,  but  go  to  fill  their  own 
empty  pockets,  and  are  often  spent  in  reckless,  riotous 
living.  The  guilty  parties  are  growing  bolder  and  bolder, 
and,  anticipating  detection  ultimately,  a  dozen  or  so  of 
them  have  agreed  to  commit  perjury  in  order  to  involve 
the  innocent  as  accomplices  in  their  crimes.  It  is  their 
boast  that  the  active  anarchists  shall  all  go  to  the  gallows 
together." 

The  history  of  terrorist  tactics  in  America  largely  cen- 
ters about  the  career  of  Johann  Most.  In  August  Bebel's 
story  of  his  life  he  speaks  in  high  terms  of  the  unselfish 
devotion  and  sterling  character  of  Most  in  his  early  days. 
"If  later  on,"  says  Bebel,  "under  the  anti-socialist  laws, 
he  went  astray  and  became  an  anarchist  and  an  advocate 
of  direct  action,  and  finally,  although  he  had  been  a  model 
of  abstinence,  ended  in  the  United  States  as  a  drunkard, 
it  was  all  due  to  the  anti-socialist  laws,  laws  which  drove 


JOHANN  MOST  IN  AMERICA  75 

him  and  many  others  from  the  country.  Had  he  re- 
mained under  the  influence  of  the  men  who  were  able  to 
guide  him  and  restrain  his  passionate  temper,  the  party 
would  have  possessed  in  him  a  most  zealous,  self-sacrific- 
ing, and  indefatigable  fighter."  (12)  Most,  then,  was 
one  of  the  victims  of  Bismarck's  savage  policies,  as  were 
also  nearly  all  the  other  Germans  who  took  part  in  the 
sordid  crimes  related  by  Tucker.  And  the  Haymarket — 
the  greatest  of  all  American  tragedies — leads  directly 
back  to  the  Iron  Chancellor  and  his  ferocious  inquisi- 
tion. 

A  few  minor  incidents  of  anarchist  activity  may  be  re- 
corded for  the  following  years,  but  the  only  acts  of  im- 
portance were  the  shooting  of  President  McKinley  by 
Czolgosz  and  the  shooting  of  Henry  C.  Frick  by  Alex- 
ander Berkman.  In  the  "Prison  Memoirs  of  an  Anar- 
chist," Berkman  has  now  told  us  that  as  a  youth  he  be- 
came a  disciple  of  Bakounin  and  a  fiery  member  of  the 
Nihilist  group.  It  was  after  the  Homestead  strike  that 
Berkman  saw  a  chance  to  propagate  his  gospel  by  a  deed. 
Leaving  his  home  in  New  York,  he  went  to  Pittsburgh 
for  the  purpose  of  killing  Henry  C.  Frick,  then  head  of 
the  Carnegie  Steel  Company.  Berkman  made  his  way 
into  Frick's  office,  shot  at  and  slightly  wounded  him.  In 
explanation  of  this  act  he  says :  "In  truth,  murder  and 
attentat  (that  is,  political  assassination)  are  to  me  oppo- 
site terms.  To  remove  a  tyrant  is  an  act  of  liberation, 
the  giving  of  life  and  opportunity  to  an  oppressed  peo- 
ple." (13)  For  this  attempt  on  the  life  of  Frick,  Berk- 
man was  condemned  to  a  term  of  imprisonment  of 
twenty-two  years.  Despite  a  few  isolated  outbreaks,  it 
may  be  said,  therefore,  that  the  seeds  of  anarchism  have 
never  taken  root  in  America,   just  as  they  have  never 


y6        VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

taken  root  in  Germany  or  in  England.  To-day  there 
are  no  active  American  terrorists  and  only  a  handful  of 
avowed  anarchists.  In  the  Latin  countries,  however,  the 
deeds  of  terrorism  still  played  a  tragic  part  in  the  his- 
tory of  the  next  few  years. 


CHAPTER   V 

A  SERIES  OF  TRAGEDIES 

While  Johann  Most  was  sowing  the  seeds  of  terror- 
ism in  America,  his  comrades  were  actively  at  work  in 
Europe.  And,  if  the  tactics  of  Most  led  eventually  to 
petty  thievery,  somewhat  the  same  degeneration  was 
overtaking  the  Propaganda  of  the  Deed  in  Europe.  Up 
to  1886  robbery  had  not  yet  been  adopted  as  a  weapon  of 
the  Latin  revolutionists.  In  America,  in  Austria,  and  in 
Russia,  the  doctrine  had  been  preached  and,  to  a  certain 
extent,  practiced,  but  V affaire  Duval  was  responsible  for 
its  introduction  into  France.  Unlike  most  of  the  pre- 
ceding demonstrations,  the  act  of  Duval  was  essentially 
an  individual  one.  On  October  5,  1886,  a  large  house  sit- 
uated at  31  rue  de  Monceau,  Paris,  and  occupied  by 
Mme.  Herbelin  and  her  daughter,  Mme.  Madeleine  Le- 
maire,  the  well-known  artist,  was  robbed  and  half 
burned.  Some  days  later,  Clement  Duval  and  two  ac- 
complices, Didier  and  Houchard,  were  arrested  as  the 
perpetrators  of  this  act.  At  first  the  matter  was  treated 
by  the  newspapers  as  an  ordinary  robbery.  The  Cri  du 
Peuple  called  it  a  simple  burglary,  followed  by  an  in- 
cendiary attempt.  But  after  some  days,  Duval  an- 
nounced himself  an  anarchist  and  declared  that  his  act 
was  in  harmony  with  his  faith. 

On  January  11  and  12,  1887,  the  case  came  before  the 
court.    The  discussions  were  very  heated.    After  M.  Fer- 

77 


78         VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

nand  Labori,  then  a  very  young  advocate,  who  had  been 
appointed  to  defend  Duval,  had  made  his  plea,  Duval 
became  anxious  to  defend  himself.  He  threatened,  in 
leaving  the  prison,  to  blow  up  Avith  dynamite  the  jury 
and  the  court,  and  heaped  upon  them  most  abusive  lan- 
guage. The  president  ordered  that  he  should  be  removed 
from  the  court.  An  enormous  tumult  then  ensued  in 
that  part  of  the  hall  where  the  anarchists  were  massed. 
"Help!  Help!  Comrades!  Long  live  Anarchy!"  cried 
Duval.  "Long  live  Anarchy!"  answered  his  comrades. 
Thirty  guards  led  Duval  away,  and  the  verdict  was  read 
in  the  presence  of  an  armed  force  with  fixed  bayonets. 
He  was  condemned  to  death  and  his  two  accomplices 
acquitted. 

Eight  days  afterward,  on  January  23,  an  indignation 
meeting  against  the  condemnation  of  Duval  was  organ- 
ized by  the  anarchists,  at  which  nearly  1,000  were  pres- 
ent. Tennevin,  Leboucher,  and  Louise  Michel  spoke  in 
turn,  glorifying  Duval.  The  opposition  was  taken  by  a 
Blanquist,  a  Normandy  citizen,  who  censured  the  act  of 
Duval,  because  such  acts,  he  said,  throw  discredit  on  the 
revolutionists  and  so  retard  the  hour  of  the  Social  Revo- 
lution. 

Duval's  case  was  appealed  to  the  highest  court  in 
France,  but  the  appeal  was  rejected.  The  President  of 
the  Republic,  however,  commuted  his  sentence  of  capital 
punishment  to  enforced  labor.  Then  followed  a  long 
period  of  discussions  and  violent  controversies  between 
the  anarchists  and  the  socalists  over  the  whole  affair. 
The  anarchists  claimed  the  right  of  theft  on  the  grounds 
that  it  was  the  beginning  of  capitalist  expropriation  and 
that  stolen  wealth  could  aid  in  propaganda  and  action. 
The  socialists,  on  the  other  hand,  protested  against  this 
theory  with  extreme  vigor. 


A  SERIES  OF  TRAGEDIES  79 

After  Duval,  there  is  little  noteworthy  in  the  terrorist 
movement  for  a  period  of  four  years,  but  with  May  1, 
1891,  there  began  what  is  known  as  La  Periode  Tragique. 
Five  notable  figures,  Decamps,  Ravachol,  Vaillant, 
Henry,  and  Caserio,  within  a  period  of  three  years,  per- 
formed a  series  of  terrorist  acts  that  cannot  be  forgot- 
ten. Their  utter  desperation  and  abandon,  the  terrible 
solemnity  of  their  lives,  and  the  almost  superhuman  ef- 
forts they  made  to  bring  society  to  its  knees  mark  the 
most  tragic  and  heroic  period  in  the  history  of  anarchism. 
At  Levallois-Perret  a  demonstration  was  organized  by 
the  anarchists  for  May  I.  They  brought  out  their  red 
and  black  flags,  and,  when  the  police  attempted  to  inter- 
fere and  to  take  away  their  banners,  they  opened  fire 
upon  them.  .Several  fell  injured,  while  others  returned 
the  fire.  The  fight  continued  for  some  time,  until  finally 
reinforcements  arrived  and  the  anarchists  were  subdued. 
Six  of  the  police  and  three  of  the  anarchists  were  se- 
verely injured,  one  of  the  latter  being  Decamps,  who  had 
received  severe  blows  from  a  sword.  The  trial  took 
place  in  August,  and,  when  Decamps  attempted  to  defend 
himself,  the  judge  refused  to  hear  him.  Finally  he  and 
his  friends  were  condemned  to  prison. 

The  next  year,  1892,  the  avenger  of  Decamps  ap- 
peared. It  was  the  famous  Ravachol,  who  for  a  time 
kept  all  Paris  in  a  state  of  terror.  In  the  night  of  Febru- 
ary 14  there  was  a  theft  of  dynamite  from  the  establish- 
ment of  Soisy-sous-Etioles.  On  March  11  an  explosion 
shook  the  house  on  Boulevard  Saint-Germain,  in  which 
lived  M.  Benoit,  the  judge  who  had  presided  in  August, 
1891,  at  the  trial  of  Decamps  at  Levallois.  On  March  15 
a  bomb  was  discovered  on  the  window  of  the  Lobau  bar- 
racks. On  March  27  a  bomb  was  exploded  on  the  first 
floor  of  a  house  on  rue  de  Clichy,  occupied  by  M.  Bulot, 


80         VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

who  had  held  the  office  of  Public  Minister  at  the  trial  in 
Levallois.  It  was  only  by  chance,  on  the  accusation  of 
a  boy  by  the  name  of  Lherot,  who  was  employed  in  a 
restaurant,  that  the  police  eventually  captured  Ravachol. 
He  admitted  having  exploded  the  bombs  in  rue  de  Clichy 
and  Boulevard  Saint-Germain,  "in  order  to  avenge,"  he 
said,  "the  abominable  violences  committed  against  our 
friends,  Decamps,  Leveille,  and  Dardare."  (i)  On 
April  26  a  bomb  was  exploded  in  the  restaurant  where 
Lherot,  the  informer,  worked,  killing  the  proprietor  and 
severely  wounding  one  of  the  patrons. 

The  public  was  thrown  into  a  state  of  dreadful  alarm. 
The  next  day,  when  Ravachol  was  brought  to  trial,  some 
awful  foreboding  seemed  to  possess  those  who  were  pres- 
ent. All  Paris  was  guarded.  In  spite  of  the  efforts  of 
the  Public  Minister,  the  jury  spared  Ravachol  on  the 
ground  of  extenuating  circumstances.  It  is  difficult  to 
say  whether  it  was  fear  or  pity  that  determined  the  de- 
cision of  the  jurors.  In  any  case,  Ravachol  was  acquit- 
ted, only  to  be  condemned  to  death  a  few  months  later 
for  strangling  the  hermit  of  Chambles,  and  he  was  then 
executed. 

"What  shall  one  think  of  Ravachol?"  says  Prolo  in 
Les  Anarchistes.  "He  assassinated  a  mendicant,  he  broke 
into  tombs  in  order  to  steal  jewels,  he  manufactured  coun- 
terfeit money,  or,  more  exactly,  substituting  himself  for 
the  State,  he  cast  five-franc  pieces  in  silver,  with  the 
authentic  standard,  and  put  them  in  circulation.  Lastly, 
he  dynamited  some  property.  He  is  of  mystical 
origin.  Profoundly  religious  in  his  early  youth,  he 
embraces  with  the  same  ardor,  the  same  passion,  and 
the  same  spirit  of  sacrifice  the  new  political  theory  of 
equality.  He  throws  himself  deliberately  outside  the  lim- 
its  of   the    society   which   he   abhors — kills,    robs,   and 


A  SERIES  OF  TRAGEDIES  8l 

avenges  his  brothers.  And  let  anyone  question  him,  he 
replies :  'A  begging  hermit,  he  is  a  parasite  and  should 
be  suppressed.  One  ought  not  to  bury  jewels  when  chil- 
dren are  hungry,  when  mothers  weep,  and  when  men  suf- 
fer from  misery.  The  State  makes  money.  Is  it  of  good 
alloy?  I  make  it  as  the  State  makes  it  and  of  the  same 
alloy!  As  to  dynamite,  it  is  the  arm  of  the  weak  who 
avenge  themselves  or  avenge  others  for  the  humiliating 
oppression  of  the  strong  and  their  unconscious  accom- 
plices.'" (2) 

Although  the  anarchists  accepted  Duval  and  defended 
his  acts,  Ravachol  was  variously  appreciated  by  them. 
Jean  Grave,  the  French  anarchist,  and  Merlino,  the  Ital- 
ian anarchist,  both  condemned  Ravachol.  "He  is  not  one 
of  us,"  declared  the  latter,  "and  we  repudiate  him.  His 
explosions  lose  their  revolutionary  character  because  of 
his  personality,  which  is  unworthy  to  serve  the  cause  of 
humanity."  (3)  Elisee  Reclus,  on  the  contrary,  wrote  of 
Ravachol  in  the  Sempre  Avanti  as  follows :  "I  admire 
his  courage,  his  goodness  of  heart,  his  grandeur  of  soul, 
the  generosity  with  which  he  has  pardoned  his  enemies. 
I  know  few  men  who  surpass  him  in  generosity.  I  pass 
over  the  question  of  knowing  up  to  what  point  it  is  al- 
ways desirable  to  push  one's  own  right  to  the  extreme 
and  whether  other  considerations,  actuated  by  a  senti- 
ment of  human  solidarity,  ought  not  to  make  it  yield. 
But  I  am  none  the  less  of  those  who  recognize  in  Rava- 
chol a  hero  of  a  rare  grandeur  of  soul."  (4) 

In  the  Entretiens  politiques  et  littcraires,  under  the 
title,  Eloge  de  Ravachol,  Paul  Adam  wrote :  "Whatever 
may  have  been  the  invectives  of  the  bourgeois  press  and 
the  tenacity  of  the  magistrates  in  dishonoring  the  act  of 
the  victim,  they  have  not  succeeded  in  persuading  us  of 
his  error.     After  so  many  judicial  debates,  chronicles, 


82        VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

and  appeals  to  legal  murder,  Ravachol  remains  the 
propagandist  of  the  grand  idea  of  the  ancient  religions 
which  extolled  the  quest  of  individual  death  for  the  good 
of  the  world,  the  abnegation  of  self,  of  one's  life,  and  of 
one's  fame  for  the  exaltation  of  the  poor  and  the  humble. 
He  is  definitely  the  Renewer  of  the  Essential  Sacri- 
fice." (5)  Museux,  in  VArt  social,  said :  "Ravachol  has 
remained  what  he  at  first  showed  himself,  a  rebel.  He 
has  made  the  sacrifice  of  his  life  for  an  idea  and  to  cause 
that  idea  to  pass  from  a  dream  into  reality.  He  has  re- 
coiled before  nothing,  claiming  the  responsibility  for  his 
acts.  He  has  been  logical  from  one  end  to  the  other. 
He  has  given  example  of  a  fine  character  and  indomita- 
ble energy,  at  the  same  time  that  he  has  summed  up  in 
himself  the  vague  anger  of  the  revolutionists."  (6) 

Hardly  had  the  people  of  Paris  gotten  over  their  ter- 
ror of  the  deeds  of  Ravachol  when  August  Vaillant  en- 
deavored to  blow  up  with  dynamite  the  French  Chamber 
of  Deputies.  He  was  a  socialist,  almost  unknown  among 
the  anarchists.  He  said  afterward  that  political-financial 
scandals  were  arousing  popular  anger  and  that  it  was 
necessary  to  thrust  the  sword  into  the  heart  of  public 
powers,  since  they  could  not  be  conquered  peaceably.  In 
order  to  carry  out  his  plan,  he  went  to  Palais-Bourbon, 
and,  when  the  session  opened,  Vaillant  arose  in  the  gal- 
lery to  throw  his  bomb.  A  woman,  perceiving  the  inten- 
tions of  the  thrower,  grasped  his  arm,  causing  the  bomb 
to  strike  a  chandelier,  with  the  result  that  only  Abbe  Le- 
mire  and  some  spectators  were  injured.  In  the  midst  of 
commotion,  with  men  stupefied  with  terror,  the  president 
of  the  Chamber,  M.  Charles  Dupuy,  called  out  the 
memorable  words,  "The  session  continues." 

Arraigned  before  the  court,  Vaillant  was  condemned 
to  <-!eath.    He  said  in  explanation  of  his  act,  "I  carried 


A  SERIES  OF  TRAGEDIES  83 

this  bomb  to  those  who  are  primarily  responsible  for  so- 
cial misery."  (7)  "Gentlemen,  in  a  few  minutes  you  are 
to  deal  your  blow,  but  in  receiving  your  verdict  I  shall 
have  at  least  the  satisfaction  of  having  wounded  the  ex- 
isting society,  that  cursed  society  in  which  one  may  see  a 
single  man  spending,  uselessly,  enough  to  feed  thousands 
of  families;  an  infamous  society  which  permits  a  few 
individuals  to  monopolize  all  the  social  wealth,  while 
there  are  hundreds  of  thousands  of  unfortunates  who 
have  not  even  the  bread  that  is  not  refused  to  dogs,  and 
while  entire  families  are  committing  suicide  for  want  of 
the  necessities  of  life.     .     .     .  (8) 

"I  conclude,  gentlemen,  by  saying  that  a  society  in 
which  one  sees  such  social  inequalities  as  we  see  all  about 
us,  in  which  we  see  every  day  suicides  caused  by  poverty, 
prostitution  flaring  at  every  street  corner — a  society 
whose  principal  monuments  are  barracks  and  prisons — 
such  a  society  must  be  transformed  as  soon  as  possible, 
on  pain  of  being  eliminated,  and  that  speedily,  from  the 
human  race.  Hail  to  him  who  labors,  by  no  matter  what 
means,  for  this  transformation!  It  is  this  idea  that  has 
guided  me  in  my  duel  with  authority,  but  as  in  this  duel 
I  have  only  wounded  my  adversary,  it  is  now  its  turn  to 
strike  me."  (9) 

The  Abbe  Lemire,  Deputy  from  the  North,  the  only 
member  of  the  Chamber  who  had  been  slightly  wounded 
by  the  explosion  of  the  bomb,  urged  the  pardon  of  the 
condemned  man.  The  socialist  Deputies  likewise  de- 
cided to  appeal  to  the  pardoning  power  of  the  President 
of  the  Republic  and  signed  the  following  petition :  "The 
undersigned,  members  of  the  Chamber  of  Deputies  which 
was  made  the  object  of  the  criminal  attempt  of  December 
9,  have  the  honor  to  address  to  the  President  of  the  Re- 


84         VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

public  a  last  appeal  in  favor  of  the  condemned."  (10) 
It  has  long  been  the  custom  in  France  not  to  punish  an 
abortive  crime  with  the  death  penalty,  and  it  was  gen- 
erally believed  that  Vaillant's  sentence  would  be  changed 
to  life  imprisonment.  President  Carnot,  however,  re- 
fused to  extend  any  mercy,  and  Vaillant  was  guillotined. 
A  few  days  after  the  execution  of  Vaillant,  a  bomb 
was  thrown  among  some  guests  who  were  quietly  assem- 
bled, listening  to  the  music,  in  the  cafe  of  the  Hotel  Ter- 
minus. Several  persons  were  severely  wounded.  After 
a  fierce  struggle  with  the  police,  Smile  Henry  was  ar- 
rested. In  the  trial  it  was  learned  that  he  had  been  re- 
sponsible for  a  number  of  other  explosions  that  had  taken 
place  in  the  two  or  three  years  previous.  He  had  at- 
tempted to  avenge  the  miners  who  had  been  on  strike  at 
Carmaux  by  blowing  up  the  manager  of  the  company. 
He  had  deposited  the  bomb  in  the  office  of  the  company, 
where  it  was  discovered  by  the  porter.  It  was  brought 
to  the  police,  where  it  exploded,  killing  the  secretary  and 
three  of  his  agents.  Henry  was  a  silent,  lonely  man, 
wholly  unknown  to  the  police.  Mystical,  sentimental, 
and  brooding,  he  believed  that  the  rich  were  individually 
responsible  for  misery  and  social  wrong.  "I  had  been 
told  that  life  was  easy  and  with  abundant  opportunity 
for  all  intellects  and  all  energies,"  he  declared  at  his  trial, 
"but  experience  has  shown  me  that  only  the  cynics  and 
the  servile  can  make  a  place  for  themselves  at  the  ban- 
quet. I  had  been  told  that  social  institutions  were  based 
on  justice  and  equality,  and  I  have  seen  about  me  only 
lies  and  deceit.  Each  day  robbed  me  of  an  illusion. 
Everywhere  I  went  I  was  witness  of  the  same  sorrows 
about  us,  of  the  same  joys  about  others.  Therefore  I 
was  not  long  in  understanding  that  the  words  which  I 
had  been  taught  to  reverence — honor,  devotion,  duty — 


A  SERIES  OF  TRAGEDIES  85 

were  nothing  but  a  veil  concealing  the  most  shameful 
baseness.     .     .     . 

"For  an  instant  I  was  attracted  by  socialism;  but  I 
was  not  long  in  withdrawing  myself  from  that  party.  I 
had  too  much  love  for  liberty,  too  much  respect  for  indi- 
vidual initiative,  too  much  dislike  for  incorporation  to 
take  a  number  in  the  registered  army  of  the  Fourth  Es- 
tate. I  brought  into  the  struggle  a  profound  hatred, 
every  day  revived  by  the  repugnant  spectacle  of  this  so- 
ciety in  which  everything  is  sordid,  ...  in  which 
everything  hinders  the  expansion  of  human  passions,  the 
generous  impulses  of  the  heart,  the  free  flight  of  thought. 
I  have,  however,  wished,  as  far  as  I  was  able,  to  strike 
forcibly  and  justly.  ...  In  this  pitiless  war  which 
we  have  declared  on  the  bourgeoisie  we  ask  no  pity.  We 
give  death  and  know  how  to  suffer  it.  That  is  why  I 
await  your  verdict  with  indifference."  (11) 

In  the  case  of  Henry  appeals  were  also  made  to  Presi- 
dent Carnot  for  mercy,  but  they,  too,  were  ignored,  and 
Henry  was  guillotined  a  few  days  after  Vaillant.  A 
month  or  so  later,  June  25,  President  Carnot  arrived  at 
Lyons  to  open  an  exposition.  That  evening,  while  on  his 
way  to  a  theater,  he  was  stabbed  to  death  by  the  Italian 
anarchist,  Caserio,  on  the  handle  of  whose  stiletto  was 
engraved  "Vaillant." 

This  was  the  climax  to  the  series  of  awful  tragedies. 
It  would  be  impossible  to  picture  the  utter  consternation 
of  the  entire  French  nation.  The  characters  that  had 
figured  in  this  terrible  drama  were  not  ordinary  men. 
Their  addresses  before  condemnation  were  so  eloquent 
and  impressive  as  to  awaken  lively  emotions  among  the 
most  thoughtful  and  brilliant  men  in  France.  They  chal- 
lenged society.  The  judge  refused  Decamps  a  hearing, 
and    Ravachol    undertook    individually    to    destroy    the 


86        VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

judge.  Vaillant,  deciding  that  the  lawmakers  were  re- 
sponsible for  social  injustice,  undertook  with  one  bomb 
to  destroy  them.  Henry,  feeling  that  it  was  not  the  law- 
makers who  were  responsible,  but  the  rich,  careless,  and 
sensual,  who  in  their  mastery  over  labor  caused  poverty, 
misery,  and  all  suffering,  sought  with  his  bomb  to  de- 
stroy them.  Utterly  blind  to  the  sentiments  which  moved 
these  men,  the  President  of  the  Republic  allowed  them 
to  be  guillotined,  and  Caserio,  stirred  to  his  very  depths 
by  what  he  considered  to  be  the  sublime  acts  of  his  com- 
rades, stabbed  to  death  the  President. 

It  is  hard  to  pass  judgment  on  lives  such  as  these.  One 
stands  bewildered  and  aghast  before  men  capable  of  such 
deeds ;  and,  if  they  defy  frivolous  judgment,  even  to  ex- 
plain them  seems  beyond  the  power  of  one  who,  in  the 
presence  of  the  same  wrongs  that  so  deeply  moved  them, 
can  still  remain  inert.  Yet  is  there  any  escape  to  the 
conclusion  that  all  this  was  utter  waste  of  life  and  de- 
votion? Far  from  awakening  in  their  opponents  the 
slightest  thought  of  social  wrong,  these  men,  at  the  ex- 
pense of  their  lives,  awakened  only  a  spirit  of  revenge. 
"An  eye  for  an  eye"  was  now  the  sentiment  of  the  mili- 
tants on  both  sides.  All  reason  and  sympathy  disap- 
peared, and,  instead,  every  brutal  passion  had  play.  Po- 
litically and  socially,  the  reactionaries  were  put  in  the 
saddle.  Every  progressive  in  France  was  placed  on  the 
defensive.  Anyone  who  hinted  of  social  wrong  was  os- 
tracized. Caesarism  ruled  France,  and,  through  les  lois 
scelerates,  every  bush  was  beaten,  every  hiding-place  un- 
covered, until  every  anarchist  was  driven  out.  The  acts 
of  Vaillant  and  Henry,  like  the  acts  of  the  Chicago  anar- 
chists, not  only  failed  utterly  as  propaganda,  they  even 
closed  the  ear  and  the  heart  of  the  world  to  everything 


A  SERIES  OF  TRAGEDIES  87 

and  anything  that  was  associated,  or  that  could  in  any 
manner  be  connected,  with  anarchism.  They  served  only 
one  purpose — every  malign  influence  and  reactionary  ele- 
ment took  the  acts  of  these  misguided  prodigies  as  a  pre- 
text to  fasten  upon  the  people  still  more  firmly  both  so- 
cial and  political  injustice.  To  no  one  were  they  so  use- 
ful as  to  their  enemy. 

For  three  years  after  this  tragic  period  little  note- 
worthy occurred  in  the  history  of  terrorism.  In  Barce- 
lona, Spain,  a  bomb  was  thrown,  and  immediately  three 
hundred  men  and  women  were  arrested.  They  were  all 
thrown  into  prison  and  subjected  to  torture.  Some  were 
killed,  others  driven  insane,  although  after  a  time  some 
were  released  upon  appeals  made  by  the  press  and  by 
many  notables  of  other  countries  of  Europe.  The  Prime 
Minister  of  Spain,  Canovas  del  Castillo,  was  chiefly  re- 
sponsible for  the  torture  of  the  victims.  And  in  1897  a 
young  Italian,  Angiolillo,  went  to  Spain,  and,  at  an  inter- 
view which  he  sought  with  the  Prime  Minister,  shot  him. 
The  same  year  an  attempt  was  made  on  the  life  of  the 
king  of  Greece,  and  in  1898  the  Empress  of  Austria  was 
assassinated  in  Switzerland  by  an  Italian  named  Luc- 
cheni.  The  latter  had  gone  there  intending  to  kill  the 
Duke  of  York,  but,  not  finding  him,  decided  to  destroy 
the  Empress.  In  1900  King  Humbert  of  Italy  was  as- 
sassinated by  Gaetano  Bresci.  The  latter  had  been  work- 
ing as  a  weaver  in  America,  where  he  had  also  edited 
an  anarchist  paper.  He  was  deeply  moved  when  the 
story  reached  him  of  some  soldiers  who  had  shot  and 
killed  some  peasants,  who  through  hunger  had  been 
driven  to  riot.  He  demanded  money  of  his  comrades  in 
Paterson,  New  Jersey,  and,  when  he  obtained  it,  hurried 
back  to  his  native  land,  where,  at  Monzo,  on  the  29th  of 
July  he  shot  the  King.     The  next  year  on  September  5, 


88         VIOLENCE  AMD  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

President  McKinley  was  shot  in  Buffalo  by  Leon  Czol- 
gosz. 

No  other  striking  figure  appears  among  the  anarchists 
until  191 2.  In  the  early  months  of  that  year  all  Paris 
was  terrified  by  a  series  of  crimes  unexampled,  it  is  said, 
in  Western  history.  The  deeds  of  Bonnot  and  his  con- 
federates were  so  reckless,  daring,  and  openly  defiant, 
their  escapes  so  miraculous,  and  the  audacity  of  their  as- 
saults so  incredible,  that  the  people  of  Paris  were  put  in  a 
state  bordering  on  frenzy.  Just  before  the  previous 
Christmas,  in  broad  daylight,  on  a  busy  street,  the  band 
fell  upon  a  bank  messenger.  They  shot  him  and  took 
from  his  wallet  $25,000.  They  then  jumped  in  an  auto- 
mobile and  disappeared.  A  short  time  later  a  police 
agent  called  upon  a  chauffeur  who  was  driving  at  excess 
speed  to  stop.  It  was  in  the  very  center  of  Paris,  but 
instead  of  slackening  his  pace  one  of  the  occupants  of 
the  car  drew  a  revolver,  and,  firing,  killed  the  officer.  A 
pursuit  was  organized,  but  the  murderers  escaped. 

Several  other  crimes  were  committed  by  the  band  in 
the  next  few  days,  but  perhaps  the  most  daring  was  that 
of  March  25.  In  the  forest  of  Senart,  at  eight  o'clock 
in  the  morning,  a  band  of  five  men  stopped  a  chauffeur 
driving  a  powerful  new  motor  car.  They  shot  the  chauf- 
feur and  injured  his  companion.  The  five  men  then  took 
the  car,  and  proceeded  at  great  speed  to  the  famous  rac- 
ing center  of  Chantilly.  They  went  directly  to  a  bank, 
descended  from  the  car,  and  shot  down  the  three  men  in 
charge  of  the  bank.  They  then  seized  from  the  safe 
$10,000.  A  crowd  which  had  gathered  was  kept  back 
by  one  of  the  bandits  with  a  rifle.  The  others  came  out, 
opened  fire  on  the  spectators,  started  the  car  at  its  utmost 
speed,  and  disappeared. 

Not  long  after,  Monsieur  Jouin,  deputy  chief  of  the 


A  SERIES  OF  TRAGEDIES  89 

Surete,  and  Chief  Inspector  Colmar  were  making  a 
domiciliary  search  in  a  house  near  Paris.  Instead  of 
finding  what  they  thought,  a  man  crouching  beneath  a 
bed  sprang  upon  them,  and  in  the  fight  Jouin  was  killed 
and  Colmar  severely  injured.  Bonnot,  although  injured, 
escaped  by  almost  miraculous  means. 

At  last,  on  April  29,  the  band,  which  had  defied  the 
police  force  of  Paris  for  four  months,  was  discovered 
concealed  in  a  garage  said  to  belong  to  a  wealthy  anar- 
chist. A  body  of  police  besieged  the  place,  and  after  two 
police  officers  were  killed  a  dynamite  cartridge  was  ex- 
ploded that  destroyed  the  garage.  Bonnot  was  then  cap- 
tured, fighting  to  the  last.  The  police  reported  the  find- 
ing of  Bonnot's  will,  in  which  he  says :  "I  am  a  cele- 
brated man.  .  .  .  Ought  I  to  regret  what  I  have 
done?  Yes,  perhaps;  but  I  must  live  my  life.  So  much 
the  worse  for  idiotic  and  imbecile  society.  ...  I  am 
not  more  guilty,"  he  continues,  "than  the  sweaters  who 
exploit  poor  devils."  (12)  His  final  thought,  it  is  said, 
was  for  his  accomplices,  both  of  whom  were  women,  one 
his  mistress,  the  other  the  manager  of  the  Journal  An- 
archic 


CHAPTER   VI 


SEEKING   THE   CAUSES 


Such  is  the  tragic  story  of  barely  forty  years  of  ter- 
rorism in  Western  Europe.  It  reads  far  more  like  lurid 
fiction  than  the  cold  facts  of  history.  Yet  these  amazing 
irreconcilables  actually  lived — in  our  time — and  fought, 
at  the  cost  of  their  lives,  the  entire  organization  of  so- 
ciety. Surely  few  other  periods  in  history  can  show  a 
series  of  characters  so  daring,  so  bitter,  so  bent  on  de- 
struction and  annihilation.  Bakounin,  Nechayeff,  Most, 
Lingg,  Duval,  Decamps,  Ravachol,  Henry,  Vaillant,  Ca- 
serio,  and  Luccheni — these  bewildering  rebels — indi- 
vidually waged  their  deadly  conflict  with  the  world. 
With  the  weakness  of  their  one  single  life  in  revolt 
against  society — protected  as  it  is  by  countless  thousands 
of  police,  millions  of  armed  men,  and  all  its  machinery 
for  defense — these  amazing  creatures  fought  their  fight 
and  wrote  their  page  of  protest  in  the  world's  history. 
Think  of  it  as  we  will,  this  we  know,  that  the  world  can- 
not utterly  ignore  men  who  lay  down  their  lives  for  any 
cause.  Men  may  write  and  agitate,  they  may  scream 
never  so  shrilly  about  the  wrongs  of  the  world,  but  when 
they  go  forth  to  fight  single-handed  and  to  die  for  what 
they  preach  they  have  at  least  earned  the  right  to  de- 
mand of  society  an  inquiry. 

What  was  it  that  drove  these  men  to  violence?  Was 
it  the  teachings  of  Bakounin,  of  Nechayeff,  and  of  Most? 
Their  writings  have  been  read   and  pondered  over  by 

90 


SEEKING  THE  CAUSES  91 

thousands  of  yearning  and  impressionable  minds.  They 
have  been  drink  to  the  thirsty  and  food  to  the  hungry. 
Yet  one  anarchist  at  least  denies  that  the  writings  of 
these  terrorists  have  moved  men  to  violence.  "My  con- 
tention is,"  says  Emma  Goldman,  "that  they  were  im- 
pelled, not  by  the  teachings  of  anarchism,  but  by  the 
tremendous  pressure  of  conditions,  making  life  unbear- 
able to  their  sensitive  natures."  (1)  Returning  again  to 
the  same  thought,  she  exclaims,  "How  utterly  fallacious 
the  stereotyped  notion  that  the  teachings  of  anarchism, 
or  certain  exponents  of  these  teachings,  are  responsible 
for  the  acts  of  political  violence."  (2)  To  this  indefa- 
tigable propagandist  of  anarchist  doctrine,  those  who  have 
been  led  into  homicidal  violence  are  "high  strung,  like  a 
violin  string."  "They  weep  and  moan  for  life,  so  relent- 
less, so  cruel,  so  terribly  inhuman.  In  a  desperate  mo- 
ment the  string  breaks."  (3) 

Yet,  if  it  be  true  that  doctrines  have  naught  to  do  with 
the  spread  of  terrorism,  why  is  it  that  among  many  mil- 
lion socialists  there  are  almost  no  terrorists,  while  among 
a  few  thousand  anarchists  there  are  many  terrorists? 
The  pressure  of  adverse  social  conditions  is  felt  as  keenly 
by  the  socialists  as  by  the  anarchists.  The  one  quite  as 
much  as  the  other  is  a  rebel  against  social  ills.  The  in- 
dictment made  by  the  socialists  against  political  and  eco- 
nomic injustice  is  as  far-reaching  as  that  of  the  anar- 
chists. Why  then  does  not  the  socialist  movement  pro- 
duce terrorists  ?  Is  it  not  that  the  teachings  of  Marx  and 
of  all  his  disciples  dwell  upon  the  folly  of  violence,  the 
futility  of  riots,  the  madness  of  assassination,  while,  on 
the  other  hand,  the  teachings  of  Bakounin,  of  Nechayeff, 
of  Kropotkin,  and  of  Most  advocate  destructive  violence 
as  a  creative  force?  "Extirpate  the  wretches!"  cries 
Most.      "Make    robbers    our    allies !"    says    Nechayeff. 


92 


VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 


"Propagate  the  gospel  by  a  deed!"  urges  Kropotkin,  and 
throughout  Bakounin's  writings  there  appears  again  and 
again  the  plea  for  "terrible,  total,  inexorable,  and  uni- 
versal destruction."  Both  socialists  and  anarchists  preach 
their  gospel  to  the  weary  and  heavy-laden,  to  the  de- 
spondent and  the  outraged,  who  may  readily  be  led  to 
commit  acts  of  despair.  They  have,  after  all,  little  to 
lose,  and  their  life,  at  present  unbearable,  can  be  made 
little  worse  by  punishment.  Yet  millions  of  the  miser- 
able have  come  into  the  socialist  movement  to  hear  the 
fiercest  of  indictments  against  capitalism,  and  it  is  but 
rare  that  one  becomes  a  terrorist.  What  else  than  the 
teachings  of  anarchism  and  of  socialism  can  explain  this 
difference? 

Unquestionably,  socialism  and  anarchism  attract  dis- 
tinctly different  types,  who  are  in  many  ways  alien  to 
each  other.  Their  mental  processes  differ.  Their  nerv- 
ous systems  jar  upon  each  other.  Even  physically  they 
have  been  known  to  repel  each  other.  Born  of  much  the 
same  conditions,  they  fought  each  other  in  the  cradle. 
From  the  very  beginning  they  have  been  irreconcilable, 
and  with  perfect  frankness  they  have  shown  their  con- 
tempt for  each  other.  About  the  kindest  criticism  that 
the  socialist  makes  of  the  anarchist  is  that  he  is  a  child, 
while  the  anarchist  is  convinced  that  the  socialist  is  a 
Philistine  and  an  inbred  conservative  who,  should  he 
ever  get  power,  would  immediately  hang  the  anarchists.* 
They  are  traditional  enemies,  who  seem  utterly  inca- 
pable of  understanding  each  other.  Intellectually,  they 
fail  to  grasp  the  meaning  of  each  other's  philosophy.  It 
is  but  rare  that  a  socialist,  no  matter  how  conscientious  a 
student,  will  confess  he  fully  understands  anarchism.    On 

*  Kropotkin,  in  "The  Conquest  of  Bread,"  p.  73,  suggests  that 
in  the  Revolution  the  socialists  will  probably  hang  the  anarchists. 


SEEKING  THE  CAUSES  93 

the  other  hand,  no  one  understands  the  doctrines  of 
socialism  so  little  as  the  anarchist.  It  is  possible,  there- 
fore, that  the  same  conditions  which  drive  the  anarchist 
to  terrorist  acts  lead  the  socialist  to  altogether  different 
methods,  but  the  reasonable  and  obvious  conclusion 
would  be  that  teachings  and  doctrines  determine  the 
methods  that  each  employ. 

The    anarchist    is,    as    Emma    Goldman    says,    "high 
strung."    His  ear  is  tuned  to  hear  unintermittently  the 
agonized   cry.     To  follow  the  imagery  of   Shelley,  he 
seems  to  be  living  in  a  "mind's  hell,"  (4)  wherein  hate, 
scorn,  pity,  remorse,  and  despair  seem  to  be  tearing  out 
the  nerves  by  their  bleeding  roots.    Bjornstjerne  Bjorn- 
son,  Francois  Coppee,  Emile  Zola,  and  many  other  great 
writers  have  sought  to  depict  the  psychology  of  the  anar- 
chist, but  I  think  no  one  has  approached  the  poet  Shel- 
ley, who  had  in  himself  the  heart  of  the  anarchist.    He 
was  a  son-in-law  and  a  disciple  of  William  Godwin,  one 
of  the  fathers  of  anarchism.     "Prometheus  Unbound," 
"The  Revolt  of  Islam,"  and  "The  Mask  of  Anarchy," 
are  expressions  of  the  very  soul  of  Godwin's  philosophy. 
Shelley  was  "cradled  into  poetry  by  wrong,"  as  a  multi- 
tude of  other  unhappy  men  are  cradled  into  terrorism  by 
wrong.    He  was  "as  a  nerve  o'er  which  do  creep  the  else 
unfelt  oppressions  of  this  earth,"  and  he  "could  moan  for 
woes  which  others  hear  not."     He,  too,  "could     .     .     . 
with  the  poor  and  trampled  sit  and  weep."  (5)     There 
is  in  nearly  all  anarchists  this  supersensitiveness,  this 
hyperesthesia  that  leads  to  ecstasy,  to  hysteria,  and  to 
fanaticism.    It  is  a  neuropathy  that  has  led  certain  scien- 
tists, like  Lombroso  and  Krafft-Ebbing,  to  suggest  that 
some  anarchist  crimes  can  only  be  looked  upon  as  a 
means  to  indirect  suicide.    They  are  outbursts  that  lead 
to  a  spectacular  martyr-like  ending  to  brains  that  "too 


94        VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

much  thought  expands,"  to  hearts  overladen,  and  to 
nerves  all  unstrung.  Life  is  a  burden  to  them,  though 
they  lack  the  courage  to  commit  suicide  directly.  Such 
is  the  view  of  these  students  of  criminal  pathology,  and 
they  cite  a  long  list  of  political  criminals  who  can  only 
be  explained  as  those  who  have  sought  indirectly  self- 
destruction.  It  is  a  type  of  insanity  that  leads  to  acts 
which  seem  sublime  to  others  in  a  state  of  like  torture 
both  of  mind  and  of  nerves. 

This  explains  no  doubt  the  acts  of  some  terrorists,  and 
at  the  same  time  it  condemns  the  present  attitude  of  so- 
ciety toward  the  terrorist.  Think  of  hanging  the  tor- 
mented soul  who  could  say  as  he  was  taken  to  the  gal- 
lows :  "I  went  away  from  my  native  place  because  I 
was  frequently  moved  to  tears  at  seeing  little  girls  of 
eight  or  ten  years  obliged  to  work  fifteen  hours  a  day  for 
the  paltry  pay  of  twenty  centimes.  Young  women  of 
eighteen  or  twenty  also  work  fifteen  hours  daily  for  a 
mockery  of  remuneration.     .     .     . 

"I  have  observed  that  there  are  a  great  many  people 
who  are  hungry,  and  many  children  who  suffer,  while 
bread  and  clothes  abound  in  the  towns.  I  saw  many  and 
large  shops  full  of  clothing  and  woolen  stuffs,  and  I 
also  saw  warehouses  full  of  wheat  and  Indian  corn,  suit- 
able for  those  who  are  in  want."  (6)  When  such  a  tor- 
tured spirit  is  driven  to  homicide,  how  is  it  possible  for 
society  to  demand  and  take  that  life?  Shall  we  admit 
that  there  is  a  duel  between  society  and  these  souls  de- 
ranged by  the  wrongs  of  society?  "In  this  duel,"  said 
Vaillant,  "I  have  only  wounded  my  adversary,  it  is  now 
his  turn  to  strike  me."  (7)  It  is  tragic  enough  that  a 
poor  and  desperate  soul,  like  Vaillant,  should  have  felt 
himself  in  deadly  combat  with  society,  but  how  much 
more  tragic  it  is  for  society  to  admit  that  fact,  accept  the 


SEEKING  THE  CAUSES  95 

challenge,  and  take  that  life!  "If  you  cannonade  us,  we 
shall  dynamite  you,"  said  Louis  Lingg.  (8)  And  we  an- 
swer, "If  you  dynamite  us,  we  shall  cannonade  you." 
And  in  so  far  as  this  is  our  sole  attitude  toward  these 
rebels,  wherein  are  we  superior?  For  Lingg  to  say  that 
was  at  least  heroic.  For  us  so  to  answer  is  not  even 
heroic.  Our  paid  men  see  to  it.  It  is  done  as  a  matter 
of  course  and  forgotten. 

These  men  say  that  justice  exists  only  for  the  power- 
ful, that  the  poor  are  robbed,  and  that  "the  lamp  of  their 
soul"  is  put  out.  They  beg  us  to  listen,  and  we  will  not. 
They  ask  us  to  read,  and  we  will  not.  "It  takes  a  loud 
voice  to  make  the  deaf  hear,"  said  Vaillant.  They  then 
give  all  they  have  to  execute  one  dreadful  deed  of 
propaganda  in  order  to  awaken  us.  Must  even  this  fail  ? 
We  can  hang  them,  but  can  we  forget  them?  After 
every  deed  of  the  anarchists  the  press,  the  police,  and  the 
pulpit  carry  on  for  weeks  a  frenzied  discussion  over 
their  atrocities.  The  lives  of  these  Propagandists  of  the 
Deed  are  then  crushed  out,  and  in  a  few  months  even 
their  names  are  forgotten.  There  seems  to  be  an  innate 
dread  among  us  to  seek  the  causes  that  lie  at  the  bottom 
of  these  distressing  symptoms  of  our  present  social 
regime.  We  prefer,  it  seems,  to  become  like  that  we  con- 
template. We  seek  to  terrorize  them,  as  they  seek  to 
terrorize  us.  As  the  anarchist  believes  that  oppression 
may  be  ended  by  the  murder  of  the  oppressor,  so  society 
cherishes  the  thought  that  anarchism  may  be  ended  by 
the  murder  of  the  anarchist.  Are  not  our  methods  in 
truth  the  same,  and  can  any  man  doubt  that  both  are 
equally  futile  and  senseless?  Both  the  anarchy  of  the 
powerful  and  the  anarchy  of  the  weak  are  stupid  and 
abortive,  in  that  they  lead  to  results  diametrically  op- 


96         VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

posed  to  the  ends  sought.     Tennyson  was  never  nearer 
a  great  social  truth  than  when  he  wrote: 

"He  that   roars   for  liberty 
Faster  binds  a  tyrant's  power; 
And   the   tyrant's   cruel   glee 
Forces  on  the  freer  hour."   (9) 

No  one  perhaps  is  better  qualified  than  Lombroso  to 
speak  on  the  present  punitive  methods  of  society  as  a 
direct  cause  of  terrorism.  "Punishment,"  he  says,  "far 
from  being  a  palliative  to  the  fanaticism  and  the  nervous 
diseases  of  others,  exalts  them,  on  the  contrary,  by  ex- 
citing their  altrustic  aberration  and  their  thirst  for  mar- 
tyrdom. In  order  to  heal  these  anarchist  wounds  there 
is,  according  to  some  statesmen,  nothing  but  hanging  on 
the  gallows  and  prison.  For  my  part,  I  consider  it  just 
indeed  to  take  energetic  measures  against  the  an- 
archists. However,  it  is  not  necessary  to  go  so  far  as 
to  take  measures  which  are  merely  the  result  of  mo- 
mentary reactions,  measures  which  thus  become  as  im- 
pulsive as  the  causes  which  have  produced  them  and  in 
their  turn  a  source  of  new  violence. 

"For  example,  I  am  not  an  unconditional  adversary  of 
capital  punishment,  at  least  when  it  is  a  question  of  the 
criminal  born,  whose  existence  is  a  constant  danger  to 
worthy  people.  Consequently,  I  should  not  have  hesi- 
tated to  condemn  Pini  *  and  Ravachol.  On  the  other 
hand,  I  believe  that  capital  punishment  or  severe  or 
merely  ignominious  penalties  are  not  suited  to  the  crimes 
and   the  offenses  of  the   anarchists  in  general.     First, 

*  Pini  declared  that  he  had  committed  robberies  amounting  to 
over  three  hundred  thousand  francs  from  the  bourgeoisie  in 
order  to  avenge  the  oppressed.  Cf.  Lombroso,  "Les  Anar- 
chistes,"  p.  52. 


SEEKING  THE  CAUSES  97 

many  of  them  are  mentally  deranged,  and  for  these  it  is 
the  asylum,  and  not  death  or  the  gallows,  that  is  fitting. 
It  is  necessary  also  to  take  account,  in  the  case  of  some 
of  these  criminals,  of  their  noble  altruism  which  renders 
them  worthy  of  certain  regard.  Many  of  these  people 
are  souls  that  have  gone  astray  and  are  hysterical,  like 
Vaillant  and  Henry,  who,  had  they  been  engaged  in  some 
other  cause,  far  from  being  a  danger,  would  have  been 
able  to  be  of  use  in  this  society  which  they  wished  to 
destroy.     .     .     . 

"As  to  indirect  suicides,  is  it  not  to  encourage  them 
and  to  make  them  attain  the  end  that  they  desire  when 
we  inflict  on  all  those  so  disposed  a  spectacular  death? 
.  .  .  For  many  criminals  by  passion,  unbalanced  by 
an  inadequate  education,  and  whose  feeling  is  aroused  by 
either  their  own  misery  or  at  the  sight  of^the  misery  of 
others,  we  would  no  more  award  the  death  penalty  if  the 
motive  has  been  exclusively  political,  because  they  are 
much  less  dangerous  than  the  criminal  born.  On  the 
other  hand,  commitment  to  the  asylum  of  the  epileptic 
and  the  hysteric  would  be  a  practical  measure,  especially 
in  France,  where  ridicule  kills  them.  Martyrs  are  ven- 
erated and  fools  are  derided."  (10) 

Of  course,  Lombroso  is  endeavoring  to  prescribe  a 
method  of  treatment  for  the  terrorist  that  will  not  breed 
more  terrorists.  He  sees  in  the  present  punitive  methods 
an  active  cause  of  violence.  However,  it  is  perhaps  im- 
possible to  hope  that  society  will  adopt  any  different  atti- 
tude than  that  which  it  has  taken  in  the  past  toward  these 
unbalanced  souls.  In  fact,  it  seems  that  a  savage  lex 
talionis  is  wholly  satisfying  to  the  feudists  on  both  sides. 
Neither  the  one  nor  the  other  seeks  to  understand  the 
forces  driving  them  both.  They  are  bent  on  destroying 
each   other,    and   they   will    probably   continue    in   that 


98         VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

struggle  for  a  long  time  to  come.  However,  if  we  learn 
little  from  those  actually  engaged  in  the  conflict,  there 
are  those  outside  who  have  labored  earnestly  to  under- 
stand and  explain  the  causes  of  terrorism.  Ethics,  re- 
ligion, psychology,  criminal  pathology,  sociology,  eco- 
nomics, jurisprudence — all  contribute  to  the  explanation. 
And,  while  it  is  not  possible  to  go  into  the  entire  matter 
as  exhaustively  as  one  could  wish,  there  are  several 
points  which  seem  to  make  clear  the  cause  of  this  almost 
individual  struggle  between  the  anarchists  above  and  the 
anarchists  below. 

Some  of  those  who  have  written  of  the  causes  of  ter- 
rorism have  a  partisan  bias.  There  are  those  among  the 
Catholic  clergy,  for  instance,  who  have  sought  to  place 
the  entire  onus  on  the  doctrines  of  modern  socialism. 
This  has,  in  turn,  led  August  Bebel  to  point  out  that  the 
teachings  of  certain  famous  men  in  the  Church  have 
condoned  assassination.  He  reminds  us  of  Mariana,  the 
Jesuit,  who  taught  under  what  circumstances  each  indi- 
vidual has  a  right  to  take  the  life  of  a  tyrant.  His  work, 
De  Rege  et  Rege  Constitntione,  was  famous  in  its  time. 
Lombroso  tells  us  that  "the  Jesuits  .  .  .  who  even 
to-day  sustain  the  divine  right  of  kings,  when  the  kings 
themselves  believe  in  it  no  longer,  revolted  at  one  time 
against  the  princes  who  were  not  willing  to  follow  them 
in  their  misoneique  and  retrograde  fanaticism  and  hurled 
themselves  into  regicide.  Thus  three  Jesuits  were  exe- 
cuted in  England  in  1551  for  complicity  in  a  conspiracy 
against  the  life  of  Elizabeth,  and  two  others  in  1605  in 
connection  with  the  powder  plot.  In  France,  Pere  Guig- 
nard  was  beheaded  for  high  treason  against  Henry  IV. 
( I595)-  Some  Jesuits  were  beheaded  in  Holland  for  the 
conspiracies  against  Maurice  de  Nassau  (1598)  ;  and, 
later  in  Portugal,  after  the  attempt  to  assassinate  King 


SEEKING  THE  CAUSES  99 

Joseph  (1757),  three  of  the  Jesuits  were  implicated;  and 
in  Spain  (1766)  still  others  were  condemned  for  their 
conspiracy  against  Ferdinand  IV. 

"During  the  same  period  two  Jesuits  were  hanged  in 
Paris  as  accomplices  in  the  attempt  against  Louis  XV. 
When  they  did  not  take  an  active  part  in  political 
crimes,  they  exercised  indirectly  their  influence  by  means 
of  a  whole  series  of  works  approving  regicide  or  tyranni- 
cide, as  they  were  pleased  to  distinguish  it  in  their  books. 
Mariana,  in  his  book,  De  Rege  et  Rege  Cotistitntione, 
praises  Clement  and  apologizes  for  regicide ;  and  that,  in 
spite  of  the  fact  that  the  Council  of  Constance  had  con- 
demned the  maxim  according  to  which  it  was  permitted 
to  kill  a  tyrant."*  (11) 

That  the  views  of  Mariana  were  very  similar  to  those 
of  the  terrorists  will  be  seen  by  the  following  quotation 
from  his  famous  book :  "It  is  a  question,"  he  writes,  in 
discussing  the  best  means  of  killing  a  king,  "whether  it  is 
more  expedient  to  use  poison  or  the  dagger.  The  use  of 
poison  in  the  food  has  a  great  advantage  in  that  it  pro- 
duces its  effect  without  exposing  the  life  of  the  one  who 
has  recourse  to  this  method.  But  such  a  death  would  be 
a  suicide,  and  one  is  not  permitted  to  become  an  accom- 
plice to  a  suicide.  Happily,  there  is  another  method 
available,  that  of  poisoning  the  clothing,  the  chairs,  the 

*  "The  work  of  Mariana  was  afterward  approved  by  Sola 
{Tr  actus  de  legibus),  by  Gretzer  {Opera  omnia),  by  Be- 
cano    (Opuscula   thcologica   Summa    Theologicce   scholastics). 

"Pere  Emanuel  (Aphorismi  confcssariorum),  Gregoire  de 
Valence  {Comment.  Theolog.),  Keller  (Tyrannicidium) ,  and 
Suarez  (Defentio  fidei  cathol.)  hold  similar  ideas,  while  Azor 
(Institut.  moral.),  Lorin  (Comm.  in  librum  psalmorum),  Co- 
mitolo  (Respoma  morala),  etc.,  recognized  the  right  of  every 
individual  to  kill  the  prince  for  his  own  defense." — Les  Anar- 
chistes,  p.  207. 


loo      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

bed.  This  is  the  method  that  it  is  necessary  to  put  into 
execution  in  imitation  of  the  Mauritanian  kings,  who, 
under  the  pretext  of  honoring  their  rivals  with  gifts, 
sent  them  clothes  that  had  been  sprinkled  with  an  in- 
visible substance,  with  which  contact  alone  has  a  fatal 
effect."  (12) 

It  has  also  been  pointed  out  that,  although  Catholics 
have  rarely  been  given  to  revolutionary  political  and  eco- 
nomic theories,  the  Mafia  and  the  Camorra  in  Italy,  the 
Fenians  in  Ireland,  and  the  Molly  Maguires  in  America 
were  all  organizations  of  Catholics  which  pursued  the 
same  terrorist  tactics  that  we  find  in  the  anarchist  move- 
ment. These  are  unquestionable  facts,  yet  they  explain 
nothing.  Certainly  Zenker  is  justified  in  saying,  "The 
deeds  of  people  like  Jacques  Clement,  Ravaillac,  Corday, 
Sand,  and  Caserio,  are  all  of  the  same  kind ;  hardly  any- 
one will  be  found  to-day  to  maintain  that  Sand's  action 
followed  from  the  views  of  the  Burschenschaft,  or 
Clement's  from  Catholicism,  even  when  we  learn  that 
Sand  was  regarded  by  his  fellows  as  a  saint,  as  was 
Charlotte  Corday  and  Clement,  or  even  when  learned 
Jesuits  like  Sa,  Mariana,  and  others,  cum  licentia  et 
approbatione  superiorum,  in  connection  with  Clement's 
outrage,  discussed  the  question  of  regicide  in  a  manner 
not  unworthy  of  Nechayeff  or  Most."  (13)  It  therefore 
ill  becomes  the  Catholic  clergy  to  attack  socialism  on  the 
ground  of  regicide,  as  not  one  socialist  book  or  one  so- 
cialist leader  has  ever  yet  been  known  to  advocate  even 
tyrannicide.  On  the  other  hand,  while  terrorism  has 
been  extraordinarily  prevalent  in  Catholic  countries,  such 
as  France,  Italy,  and  Spain,  no  socialist  will  seriously 
seek  to  lay  the  blame  on  the  Catholic  Church.  The  truth 
is  that  the  forces  which  produce  terrorism  affect  the 
Catholic  mind  as  they  affect  the  Protestant  mind.     In 


SEEKING  THE  CAUSES  ioi 

every  struggle  for  liberty  and  justice  against  religious, 
political,  or  industrial  oppression,  some  men  are  moved 
to  take  desperate  measures  regardless  of  whether  they 
are  Catholics,  Protestants,  or  pagans. 

Still  other  seekers  after  the  causes  of  terrorism  have 
pointed  out  that  the  ethics  of  our  time  appear  to  justify 
the  terrorist  and  his  tactics.  History  glorifies  the  deeds 
of  numberless  heroes  who  have  destroyed  tyrants.  The 
story  of  William  Tell  is  in  every  primer,  and  every 
schoolboy  is  thrilled  with  the  tale  of  the  hero  who  shot 
from  ambush  Gessler,  the  tyrant.*  From  the  Old  Testa- 
ment down  to  even  recent  history,  we  find  story  after 
story  which  make  immortal  patriots  of  men  who  have 
committed  assassination  in  the  belief  that  they  were  serv- 
ing their  country.  And  can  anyone  doubt  that  Booth 
when  he  shot  President  Lincoln  f  or  that  Czolgosz  when 
he  murdered  President  McKinley  was  actuated  by  any 
other  motive  than  the  belief  that  he  was  serving  a  cause? 
It  was  the  idea  of  removing  an  industrial  tyrant  that 
actuated  young  Alexander  Berkman  when  he  shot  Henry 
C.  Frick,  of  the  Carnegie  Company.  These  latter  acts 
are  not  recorded  in  history  as  heroic,  simply  and  solely 

*  Bakounin,  when  endeavoring  to  save  Nechayeff  from  being 
arrested  by  the  Swiss  authorities  and  sent  back  to  Russia,  de- 
fends him  on  precisely  these  grounds,  claiming  that  Nechayeff 
had  taken  the  fable  of  William  Tell  seriously.  Cf.  CEuvres, 
Vol.  II,  p.  29. 

t  Booth  wrote,  a  day  or  so  after  killing  Lincoln :  "After 
being  hunted  like  a  dog  through  swamps  and  woods,  and  last 
night  being  chased  by  gunboats  till  I  was  forced  to  return,  wet, 
cold,  and  starving,  with  every  man's  hand  against  me,  I  am 
here  in  despair.  And  why?  For  doing  what  Brutus  was  hon- 
ored for — what  made  William  Tell  a  hero;  and  yet  I,  for  strik- 
ing down  an  even  greater  tyrant  than  they  ever  knew,  am  looked 
upon  as  a  common  cutthroat."  Cf.  "The  Death  of  Lincoln," 
Laughlin,  p.  135.     . 


102      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

because  the  popular  view  was  not  in  sympathy  with  those 
acts.  Yet  had  they  been  committed  at  another  time,  un- 
der different  conditions,  the  story  of  these  men  might 
have  been  told  for  centuries  to  admiring  groups  of  chil- 
dren. 

In  Carlyle's  "Hero  Worship"  and  in  his  philosophy  of 
history,  the  progress  of  the  world  is  summarized  under 
the  stories  of  great  men.  Certain  individuals  are  re- 
sponsible for  social  wrongs,  while  other  individuals  are 
responsible  for  the  great  revolutions  that  have  righted 
those  wrongs.  In  the  building  up,  as  well  as  in  the  de- 
struction of  empires,  the  individual  plays  stupendous 
roles.  This  egocentric  interpretation  of  history  has  not 
only  been  the  dominant  one  in  explaining  the  great  po- 
litical changes  of  the  past,  it  is  now  the  reasoning  of  the 
common  mind,  of  the  yellow  press,  of  the  demagogue,  in 
dealing  with  the  causes  of  the  evils  of  the  present  day. 
The  Republican  Party  declared  that  President  McKin- 
ley  was  responsible  for  prosperity ;  by  equally  sound  rea- 
soning Czolgosz  may  have  argued  that  he  was  responsi- 
ble for  social  misery.  According  to  this  theory,  Rocke- 
feller is  the  giant  mind  that  invented  the  trusts ;  political 
bosses  such  as  Croker  and  Murphy  are  the  infamous 
creatures  who  fasten  upon  a  helpless  populace  of  mil- 
lions of  souls  a  Tammany  Hall ;  Bismarck  created  mod- 
ern Germany ;  Lloyd  George  created  social  reform  in 
England ;  while  Tom  Mann  in  England  and  Samuel 
Gompers  in  America  are  responsible  for  strikes;  and 
Keir  Hardie  and  Eugene  Debs  responsible  for  socialism. 
The  individual  who  with  great  force  of  ability  becomes 
the  foremost  figure  in  social,  political,  or  industrial  de- 
velopment is  immediately  assailed  or  glorified.  He  be- 
comes the  personification  of  an  evil  thing  that  must  be 
destroyed  or  of  a  good  thing  that  must  be  protected.     It 


SEEKING  THE  CAUSES  103 

is  a  result  of  such  reasoning  that  men  ignorant  of  under- 
lying social,  political,  or  industrial  forces  seek  to  obstruct 
the  processes  of  evolution  by  removing  the  individual. 
On  this  ground  the  anarchists  have  been  led  to  remove 
hundreds  of  police  officials,  capitalists,  royalties,  and 
others.  They  have  been  poisoned,  shot,  and  dynamited, 
in  the  belief  that  their  removal  would  benefit  humanity. 
Yet  nothing  would  seem  to  be  quite  so  obvious  as  the  fact 
that  their  removal  has  hardly  caused  a  ripple  in  the 
swiftly  moving  current  of  evolution.  Others,  often  more 
forceful  and  capable,  have  immediately  stepped  into  their 
places,  and  the  course  of  events  has  remained  unchanged. 
Speaking  on  this  subject,  August  Bebel  refers  to  the 
hero-worship  of  Bismarck  in  Germany :  "There  is  no 
other  person  whom  the  social  democracy  had  so  much 
reason  to  hate  as  him,  and  the  social  democracy  was  not 
more  hated  by  anybody  than  by  just  that  Bismarck.  Our 
love  and  our  hatred  were,  as  you  see,  mutual.  But  one 
would  search  in  vain  the  entire  social  democratic  press 
and  literature  for  an  expression  of  the  thought  that  it 
would  be  a  lucky  thing  if  that  man  were  removed. 
.  .  .  But  how  often  did  the  capitalist  press  express 
the  idea  that,  were  it  not  for  Bismarck,  we  would  not,  to 
this  day,  hav^e  a  united  Germany?  There  cannot  be  a 
more  mistaken  idea  than  this.  The  unity  of  Germany 
would  have  come  without  Bismarck.  The  idea  of  unity 
and  liberty  was  in  the  sixties  so  powerful  among  all  the 
German  people  that  it  would  have  been  realized,  with  or 
without  the  assistance  of  the  Hohenzollerns.  The  unity 
of  Germany  was  not  only  a  political  but  an  economic 
necessity,  primarily  in  the  interests  of  the  capitalist  class 
and  its  development.  The  idea  of  unity  would  have  ulti- 
mately broken  through  with  elementary  force.  At  this 
juncture  Bismarck  made  use  of  the  tendency,  in  his  own 


104      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

fashion,  in  the  interest  of  the  Hohenzollern  dynasty,  and 
at  the  same  time  in  the  interest  of  the  capitalist  class  and 
of  the  Junkers,  the  landed  nobility.  The  offspring  of  this 
compromise  is  the  Constitution  of  the  German  Empire, 
the  provisions  of  which  strive  to  reconcile  the  interests 
of  these  three  factors.  Finally,  even  a  man  like  Bis- 
marck had  to  leave  his  post.  'What  a  misfortune  for 
Germany!'  cried  the  press  devoted  to  him.  Well,  what 
has  happened  to  Germany  since  then?  Even  Bismarck 
himself  could  not  have  ruled  it  much  differently  than  it 
has  been  ruled  since  his  days."  (14) 

This  egoistic  conception  of  history  is  carried  to  its 
most  violent  extreme  by  the  anarchists.  The  principles 
of  Nechayeff  are  a  series  of  prescriptions  by  which  fear- 
less and  reckless  individuals  may  destroy  other  indi- 
viduals. Ravachol,  Vaillant,  and  Henry  seemed  ob- 
sessed with  the  idea  that  upon  their  individual  acts  rested 
the  burden  of  deliverance.  Bonnot's  last  words  were, 
"I  am  a  celebrated  man."  From  the  gallows  in  Chicago 
Fischer  declared,  "This  is  the  happiest  moment  of  my 
life."  (15)  "Call  your  hangman!"  exclaimed  August 
Spies.  "Truth  crucified  in  Socrates,  in  Christ,  in  Gior- 
dano Bruno,  in  Huss,  in  Galileo,  still  lives — they  and 
others  whose  name  is  legion  have  preceded  us  on  this 
path.  We  are  ready  to  follow!"  (16)  Fielden  said :  "I 
have  loved  my  fellowmen  as  I  have  loved  myself.  I 
have  hated  trickery,  dishonesty,  and  injustice.  The  nine- 
teenth century  commits  the  crime  of  killing  its  best 
friend."  (17)  It  is  singularly  impressive,  in  reading  the 
literature  of  anarchism,  to  weigh  the  last  words  of  men 
who  felt  upon  their  souls  the  individual  responsibility  of 
saving  humanity.  They  have  uttered  memorable  words 
because  of  their  inherent  sincerity,  their  devout  belief  in 


SEEKING  THE  CAUSES  105 

the  individual,  in  his  power  for  evil,  and  in  his  power  to 
remove  that  evil. 

In  many  anarchists,  however,  this  deification  of  the  in- 
dividual induces  a  morbid  and  diseased  egotism  which 
drives  them  to  the  most  amazing  excesses ;  among  others, 
the  yearning  to  commit  some  memorable  act  of  revolt  in 
order  to  be  remembered.  In  fact,  the  ego  in  its  worst, 
as  well  as  in  its  best  aspect,  dominates  the  thought  and 
the  literature  of  anarchism.  Max  Stirner,  considered 
by  some  the  founder  of  philosophical  anarchism,  calls  his 
book  "The  Ego  and  His  Own."  "Whether  what  I  think 
and  do  is  Christian,"  he  writes,  "what  do  I  care? 
Whether  it  is  human,  liberal,  humane,  whether  unhuman, 
illiberal,  inhuman,  what  do  I  ask  about  that?  If  only  it 
accomplishes  what  I  want,  if  only  I  satisfy  myself  in  it, 
then  overlay  it  with  predicates  as  you  will ;  it  is  all  alike 
to  me."  (18)  "Consequently  my  relation  to  the  world 
is  this:  I  no  longer  do  anything  for  it  'for  God's  sake,' 
I  do  nothing  'for  man's  sake,'  but  what  I  do  I  do  'for  my 
sake.'  "  (19)  "Where  the  world  comes  in  my  way — and 
it  comes  in  my  way  everywhere — I  consume  it  to  quiet 
the  hunger  of  my  egoism.  For  me  you  are  nothing  but 
— my  food,  even  as  I,  too,  am  fed  upon  and  turned  to 
use  by  you."  (20) 

Here  society  is  conceived  of  as  merely  a  collection  of 
egos.  The  world  is  a  history  of  gods  and  of  devils.  All 
the  evils  of  the  time  are  embodied  in  individual  tyrants. 
Some  of  these  individuals  control  the  social  forces,  others 
the  political,  still  others  the  industrial  forces.  As  indi- 
viduals, they  overpower  and  enslave  their  individual  ene- 
mies. Remove  a  man  and  you  destroy  the  source  of 
tyranny.  A  judge  commits  a  man  to  death,  and  the 
judge  is  dynamited.  A  Prime  Minister  sends  the  army 
to  shoot  down  striking  workmen  and  the  Prime  Minister 


106      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

is  shot.     A  law  is  passed  violating  the  rights  of  free 
speech,  and,  following  that,  an  Emperor  is  shot.     The 
rich  exploit  the  poor,  and  a  fanatic  throws  a  bomb  in  the 
first  cafe  he  passes  to  revenge  the  poor.     Wicked  and 
unjust  laws  are  made,  and  Vaillant  goes  in  person  to  the 
Chamber  of  Deputies  to  throw  his  bomb.    The  police  of 
Chicago  murder  some  hungry  strikers,  and  an  avenger 
goes   to  the  Haymarket  to  murder  the  police.     In  all 
these  acts  we  find  a  point  of  view  in  harmony  with  the 
dominant  one  of  our  day.     It  is  the  one  taught  in  our 
schools,  in  our  pulpits,  on  our  political  platforms,  and 
in  our  press.     It  is  the  view,  carried  to  an  extreme,  of 
that  man  or  group  of  men  who  believes  that  the  ideas  of 
individuals   determine  social  evolution.     Nothing  could 
be  more  logical  to  the  revolutionist  who  holds  this  view 
than  to  seek  to  remove  those  individuals  who  are  re- 
sponsible for  the  existing  order  of  society.     As  a  rule, 
the  socialist  stands  almost  alone  in  combating  this  ideo- 
logical interpretation  of  history  and  of  social  evolution. 
There  is  something  in  the  nature  of  poetic  irony  in 
the  fact  that  the  anarchist  should  take  the  very  ethics  of 
capitalism  and  reduce  them  to  an  absurdity.    It  is  some- 
thing in  the  nature  of  a  satire,  sordid  and  terrible,  which 
the    realism    of    things    has    here    written.      The    very 
most  cherished  ethical  ideals  of  our  society  are  used  by 
the    bitterest    enemies    of    that    society    to    arouse    the 
wronged  to  individual  acts  of  revenge.    Quite  a  number 
of  notable  anarchists  have  been  the  product  of  misery 
and  oppression.     Their  souls  were  warped,   and   their 
minds  distorted  in  childhood  by  hunger  and  brutality. 
They  were  wronged  terribly  by  the  world,  and  anarchism 
came  to  them  as  a  welcome  spirit,  breathing  revenge.    It 
taught  that  the  world   was  wrong,  that  injustice   rode 
over  it  like  a  nightmare,  that  misery  flourished  in  the 


SEEKING  THE  CAUSES  10J 

midst  of  abundance,  that  multitudes  labored  with  bent 
backs  to  produce  luxuries  for  the  few.  Their  eyes  were 
opened  to  the  wrong  of  hunger,  poverty,  unemployment, 
of  woman  and  child  labor,  and  of  all  the  miseries  that 
press  heavily  upon  human  souls.  And  in  their  revolt 
they  saw  kings,  judges,  police  officials,  legislators,  cap- 
tains of  industry,  who  were  said  to  be  directly  responsi- 
ble for  these  social  ills.  It  was  not  society  or  a  system 
or  even  a  class  that  was  to  blame;  it  was  McKinley,  or 
Carnot,  or  Frick.  And  those  whom  some  worshiped  as 
heroes,  these  men  loathed  as  tyrants. 

The  powerful  have  thought  to  deprive  the  poor  of 
souls.  They  have  liked  to  think  that  they  would  forever 
bear  their  cross  in  peace.  Yet  when  anarchism  comes 
and  touches  the  souls  of  the  poor  it  finds  not  dead  blocks 
of  wood  or  mere  senseless  cogs  in  an  industrial  ma- 
chine; it  finds  the  living,  who  can  pray  and  weep,  love 
and  hate.  No  matter  how  seared  their  souls  become, 
there  is  yet  a  possibility  that  their  whole  beings  may  re- 
volt under  wrong.  When  the  anarchist  deifies  even  the 
veriest  wreck  of  society — this  individual,  "this  god, 
though  in  the  germ" — when  he  inflames  it  with  dignity 
and  with  pride,  when  he  fills  its  whole  being  with  a 
thirst  for  awful  and  incredible  vengeance,  you  have  Du- 
val, Lingg,  Ravachol,  Luccheni,  and  Bonnot.  Add  to 
their  desire  for  revenge  the  philosophy  of  anarchism  and 
of  our  schoolbooks,  that  individuals  are  the  makers  of 
history,  and  the  result  is  terrorism. 

Other  students  of  terrorism  have  noted  the  preva- 
lence of  violence  in  those  countries  and  times  where  the 
courts  are  corrupt,  where  the  law  is  brutal  and  oppres- 
sive, or  where  men  are  convinced  that  no  available  ma- 
chinery exists  to  execute  the  ends  of  justice.  This  lat- 
ter is  the  explanation  given  for  the  numerous  lynchings 


108       VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

in  America  and  also  for  the  practices  of  "popular  jus- 
tice" that  used  to  be  a  common  feature  of  frontier  life. 
In  the  absence  of  a  properly  constituted  legal  machinery 
groups  of  men  undertake  to  shoot,  hang,  or  burn  those 
whom  they  consider  dangerous  to  the  public  weal.  In 
Russia  it  was  inevitable  that  a  terrorist  movement  should 
arise.  The  courts  were  corrupt,  the  bureaucracy  oppres- 
sive. Furthermore,  no  form  of  freedom  existed.  Men 
could  neither  speak  nor  write  their  views.  They  could 
not  assemble,  and  until  recently  they  did  not  possess  the 
slightest  voice  in  the  affairs  of  government.  Borne 
down  by  a  most  hideous  oppression,  the  terrorist  was  the 
natural  product.  The  same  conditions  have  existed  to 
an  extent  in  Italy,  and  probably  no  other  country  has 
produced  so  many  violent  anarchists.  Caserio,  Luccheni, 
Bresci,  and  Angiolillo  have  been  mentioned,  but  there 
are  others,  such  as  Santoro,  Mantica,  Benedicti,  although 
these  latter  are  accused  of  being  police  agents.  In  Italy 
the  people  have  for  centuries  individually  undertaken  to 
execute  their  conception  of  equity.  Official  justice  was 
too  costly  to  be  available  to  the  poor,  and  the  courts 
were  too  corrupt  to  render  them  justice.  For  centuries, 
therefore,  men  have  been  considered  justified  in  murder- 
ing their  personal  enemies.  Among  all  classes  it  has  long 
been  customary  to  deal  individually  with  those  who  have 
committed  certain  crimes.  The  horrible  legal  condi- 
tions existing  in  both  Spain  and  Italy  have  developed 
among  these  peoples  the  idea  of  "self-help."  They  have 
taken  law  into  their  own  hands,  and,  according  to  their 
lights  and  passions,  have  meted  out  their  rude  justice. 
Assassination  has  been  defended  in  these  countries,  as 
lynching  has  been  defended  recently,  as  some  will  re- 
member, by  a  most  eminent  American  anarchist,  the  Gov- 
ernor of  South  Carolina. 


SEEKING  THE  CAUSES  *09 

Lombroso  says  in  his  exhaustive  study  of  the  causes 
of  violence,  Les  Anarchistes:  "History  is  rich  in  exam- 
ples of  the  complicity  of  criminality  and  politics,  and 
where  one  sees  in  turn  political  passion  react  on  criminal 
instinct  and  criminal  instinct  on  political  passion.  While 
Pompey  has  on  his  side  all  honest  people — Cato,  Brutus, 
Cicero;  Caesar,  more  popular  than  he,  has  as  his  follow- 
ers only  degenerates — Antony,  a  libertine  and  drunkard ; 
Curio,  a  bankrupt;  Clelius,  a  madman;  Dolabella,  who 
made  his  wife  die  of  grief  and  who  wanted  to  annul 
all  debts;  and,  above  all,  Catiline  and  Clodius.  In 
Greece  the  Clefts,  who  are  brigands  in  time  of  peace, 
have  valiantly  championed  the  independence  of  their 
country.  In  Italy,  in  i860,  the  Papacy  and  the  Bour- 
bons hired  brigands  to  oppose  the  national  party  and  its 
troops;  the  Mafia  of  Sicily  rose  up  with  Garibaldi;  and 
the  Camorra  of  Naples  cooperated  with  the  liberals.  And 
this  shameful  alliance  with  the  Camorra  of  Naples  is  not 
yet  dissolved ;  the  last  parliamentary  struggles  relative  to 
the  acts  of  the  government  of  Naples  have  given  us  a 
sad  echo  of  it — which,  alas,  proves  that  it  still  lasts  with- 
out hope  of  change  for  the  future.  It  is  especially  at  the 
initial  stages  of  revolutions  that  these  sorts  of  people 
abound.  It  is  then,  indeed,  that  the  abnormal  and  un- 
healthy spirits  predominate  over  the  faltering  and  the 
weak  and  drag  them  on  to  excesses  by  an  actual  epi- 
demic of  imitation."  (21) 

Marx  and  Engels  saw  very  clearly  the  part  that  the 
criminal  elements  would  play  in  any  uprising,  and  as 
early  as  1847  tnev  wrote  in  the  Communist  Manifesto: 
"The  'dangerous  class,'  the  social  scum,  that  passively 
rotting  mass  thrown  off  by  the  lowest  layers  of  old  so- 
ciety, may,  here  and  there,  be  swept  into  the  movement 
by  a  proletarian  revolution ;  its  conditions  of  life,  how- 


HO      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

ever,  prepare  it  far  more  for  the  part  of  a  bribed  tool  of 
reactionary  intrigue."  (22)  The  truth  of  this  statement 
has  been  amply  illustrated  in  the  numerous  outbreaks 
that  have  occurred  since  it  was  written.  The  use  by  the 
Bakouninists  in  Spain  of  the  criminal  elements  there, 
the  repeated  exploits  of  the  police  agents  in  discrediting 
every  uprising  by  encouraging  the  criminal  elements  to 
outrageous  acts,  and  the  terrible  barbarities  of  the  crim- 
inal classes  at  the  time  of  the  Paris  Commune  are  all  ex- 
amples of  how  useful  to  reaction  the  rotting  layers  of 
old  society  may  become.  Even  when  they  do  not  serve 
as  a  bribed  tool  of  the  reactionary  elements,  their  atroci- 
ties, both  cruel  and  criminal,  repel  the  self-respecting  and 
conscientious  elements.  They  discredit  the  real  revolu- 
tionists, who  must  bear  the  stigma  that  attaches  to  the 
inhuman  acts  of  the  "dangerous  class." 

That  the  European  governments  have  used  the  terror- 
ists in  exactly  this  manner  in  order  to  discredit  popular 
movements,  is  not,  I  think,  open  to  any  question.  The 
money  of  the  anarchists'  bitterest  enemy  has  helped  to 
make  anarchy  so  well  known.  The  politics  of  Machia- 
velli  is  the  politics  of  nearly  every  old  established  Euro- 
pean government.  It  is  the  politics  of  families  who  have 
been  trained  in  the  profession  of  rulership.  And  this 
mastership,  as  William  Morris  has  said,  has  many  shifts. 
And  one  that  has  been  most  useful  to  them  is  that  of 
subsidizing  those  persons  or  elements  who  by  their  acts 
promote  reaction.  In  Russia  it  is  an  old  custom  to  fo- 
ment and  provoke  minor  insurrections.  Police  agents 
enter  a  discontented  district  and  do  all  possible  to  irri- 
tate the  troublesome  elements  and  to  force  them  "to 
come  into  the  street."  In  this  manner  the  agitators  and 
leaders  are  brought  to  the  front,  where  at  one  stroke 
they  may  all  be  shot.     Furthermore,  the  police  agents 


SEEKING  THE  CAUSES  ill 

themselves  commit  or  provoke  such  atrocious  crimes  that 
the  people  are  terrified  and  welcome  the  strong  arm  of 
the  Government.  Literally  scores  of  instances  might  be 
given  where,  by  well-planned  work  of  this  sort,  the  active 
leaders  are  cut  down,  the  sources  of  agitation  destroyed, 
and  through  the  robberies,  murders,  and  dynamite  out- 
rages of  police  agents  the  people  are  so  terrified  that  they 
welcome  the  intervention  of  even  tyranny  itself. 

An  immense  sensation  throughout  Europe  was  created 
by  an  address  by  Jules  Guesde  in  the  French  Chamber 
of  Deputies,  the  19th  of  July,  1894.  The  deeds  of  Rava- 
chol,  Vaillant,  and  Henry  were  still  the  talk  of  Europe, 
and,  three  weeks  before,  the  President  of  the  Republic 
had  been  stabbed  to  death  by  Caserio.  It  was  in  that 
critical  period,  amidst  commotions,  interruptions,  pro- 
tests, and  exclamations  of  amazement,  that  Guesde 
brought  out  his  evidence  that  the  chief  of  police  of  Paris 
had  paid  regular  subsidies  to  promote  and  extend  both 
the  preaching  and  the  practice  of  violent  anarchism.  He 
introduced,  in  support  of  his  remarks,  portions  from  the 
Memoirs  of  M.  Andrieux,  our  old  friend  of  Lyons  and 
later  the  head  of  the  Paris  police.  "The  anarchists,"  says 
Andrieux,  "wished  to  have  a  newspaper  to  spread  their 
doctrines.  If  I  fought  their  Propaganda  of  the  Deed, 
I  at  least  favored  the  spread  of  their  doctrines  by  means 
of  the  press,  and  I  have  no  reasons  for  depriving  my- 
self longer  of  their  gratitude.*  The  companions  were 
looking  for  some  one  to  advance  funds,  but  infamous 

*  Kropotkin  tells  of  the  effort  made  by  the  agents  of  Andrieux 
to  persuade  him  and  Elisee  Reclus  to  collaborate  in  the  publica- 
tion of  this  so-called  anarchist  paper.  He  also  says  it  was  a 
paper  of  "unheard-of  violence;  burning,  assassination,  dynamite 
bombs — there  was  nothing  but  that  in  it." — "Memoirs  of  a  Rev- 
olutionist," pp.  478-480. 


112      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

capital  was  in  no  hurry  to  reply  to  their  appeal.  I  shook 
it  up  and  succeeded  in  persuading  it  that  it  was  for  its 
own  interest  to  aid  in  the  publication  of  an  anarchist 
newspaper.     .     .     . 

"But  do  not  think  that  I  boldly  offered  to  the  an- 
archists the  encouragement  of  the  Prefect  of  Police. 
.  .  .  I  sent  a  well-dressed  bourgeois  to  one  of  the 
most  active  and  intelligent  of  them.  He  explained  that, 
having  acquired  a  fortune  in  the  drug  business,  he  de- 
sired to  devote  a  part  of  his  income  to  help  their  propa- 
ganda. This  bourgeois,  anxious  to  be  devoured,  awak- 
ened no  suspicion  among  the  companions.  Through  his 
hands,  I  deposited  the  caution  money  in  the  coffers  of 
the  State,  and  the  paper,  la  Revolution  Sociale,  made  its 
appearance.  .  .  .  Every  day,  about  the  table  of  the 
editors,  the  authorized  representatives  of  the  party  of  ac- 
tion assembled ;  they  looked  over  the  international  corre- 
spondence ;  they  deliberated  on  the  measures  to  be  taken 
to  end  'the  exploitation  of  man  by  man' ;  they  imparted  to 
each  other  the  recipes  which  science  puts  at  the  disposal 
of  revolution.  I  was  always  represented  in  the  councils, 
and  I  gave  my  advice  in  case  of  need.  .  .  .  The 
members  had  decided  in  the  beginning  that  the  Palais- 
Bourbon  must  be  blown  up.  They  deliberated  on  the 
question  as  to  whether  it  would  not  be  more  expedient 
to  commence  with  some  more  accessible  monument.  The 
Bank  of  France,  the  palais  de  I'tLlysee,  the  house  of  the 
prefect  of  police,  the  office  of  the  Minister  of  the  In- 
terior were  all  discussed,  then  abandoned,  by  reason  of 
the  too  careful  surveillance  of  which  they  were  the  ob- 
ject." (23)  Toward  the  end  of  his  address,  Guesde 
turned  to  the  reactionaries,  and  said :  "I  have  shown  you 
that  everywhere,  from  the  beginning  of  the  anarchist 
epidemic  in   France,  you  find   either   the  hand  or  the 


SEEKING  THE  CAUSES  113 

money  of  one  of  your  prefects  of  police.  .  .  .  That 
is  how  you  have  fought  in  the  past  this  anarchistic  danger 
of  which  you  make  use  to-day  to  commit,  what  shall  I 
say?  .  .  .  real  crimes,  not  only  against  socialism,  but 
against  the  Republic  itself."  (24) 

For  the  last  forty  years  police  agents  have  swarmed 
into  the  socialist,  the  anarchist,  and  the  trade-union 
movements  for  the  purpose  of  provoking  violence.  The 
conditions  grew  so  bad  in  Russia  that  every  revolution- 
ist suspected  his  comrade.  Many  loyal  revolutionists 
were  murdered  in  the  belief  that  they  were  spies.  In 
the  belief  that  they  were  comrades,  the  faithful  intrusted 
their  innermost  secrets  to  the  agents  of  the  police.  Every 
plan  they  made  was  known.  Every  undertaking  proved 
abortive,  because  the  police  knew  everything  in  advance 
and  frequently  had  in  charge  of  every  plot  their  own 
men.  Criminals  were  turned  into  the  movement  under 
the  surveillance  of  the  police.*  All  through  the  days  of 
the  International  it  was  a  common  occurrence  to  expose 
police  spies,  and  in  every  national  party  agents  of  the  po- 
lice have  been  discovered  and  driven  out.  It  has  become 
almost  a  rule,  in  certain  sections  of  the  socialist  and  labor 
movements,  that  the  man  who  advocates  violence  must 
be  watched,  and  there  are  numerous  instances  where  such 
men  have  been  proved  to  be  paid  agents  of  the  police. 
Joseph  Peukert  was  for  many  years  one  of  the  foremost 
leaders  of  the  anarchists.  He  was  in  Vienna  with  Stell- 
macher  and  Kammerer,  and  devoted  much  of  his  time  to 
translating  into  German  the  works  of  foreign  anarchists. 

*In  "The  Terror  in  Russia"  Kropotkin  tells  of  bands  of 
criminals  who,  under  pretense  of  being  revolutionists  and  want- 
ing money  for  revolutionary  purposes,  forced  wealthy  people  to 
contribute  under  menace  of  death.  The  headquarters  of  the 
bands  were  at  the  office  of  the  secret  police. 


H4      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

It  was  only  discovered  toward  the  end  of  his  life  that 
during  all  this  time  he  was  in  the  employ  of  the  Aus- 
trian police. 

These  and  similar  startling  facts  were  brought  out  by 
August  Bebel  in  an  address  delivered  in  Berlin,  Novem- 
ber 2,  1898.  Luccheni  had  just  murdered  the  Empress 
of  Austria,  and  the  German  reactionaries  attempted,  of 
course,  to  connect  him  with  the  socialists.  Bebel  created 
utter  consternation  in  their  camp  when,  as  a  part  of  his 
address,  he  showed  the  active  participation  of  high  offi- 
cials in  crimes  of  the  anarchists.  "And  how  often,"  said 
Bebel,  "police  agents  have  helped  along  in  the  attempted 
or  executed  assassinations  of  the  last  decades.  When 
Bismarck  was  Federal  Ambassador  at  Frankfort-on-the- 
Main  he  wrote  to  his  wife:  'For  lack  of  material  the 
police  agents  lie  and  exaggerate  in  a  most  inexcusable 
manner.'  These  agents  are  engaged  to  discover  contem- 
plated assassinations.  Under  these  circumstances,  the 
bad  fellows  among  them  .  .  .  come  easily  to  the 
idea :  Tf  other  people  don't  commit  assassinations,  then 
we  ourselves  must  help  the  thing  along.'  For,  if  they 
cannot  report  that  there  is  something  doing,  they  will  be 
considered  superfluous,  and,  of  course,  they  don't  want 
that  to  happen.  So  they  'help  the  thing  along'  by  'cor- 
recting luck,'  as  the  French  proverb  puts  it.  Or  they 
play  politics  on  their  own  score. 

"To  demonstrate  this  I  need  only  to  remind  you  of 
the  'reminiscences'  of  Andrieux,  the  former  Chief  of  Po- 
lice of  Paris,  in  which  he  brags  with  the  greatest  cynic- 
ism of  how  he,  by  aid  of  police  funds,  subsidized  ex- 
treme Anarchist  papers  and  organized  Anarchist  assassi- 
nations, just  to  give  a  thorough  scare  to  rich  citizens. 
And  then  there  is  that  notorious  Police  Inspector  Mel- 
ville, of  London,  who  also  operated  on  these  lines.    That 


SEEKING  THE  CAUSES  115 

was  revealed  by  the  investigation  of  the  so-called  Wal- 
sall attempt  at  assassination.  Among  the  assassinations 
committed  by  the  Fenians  there  were  also  some  that  were 
the  work  of  the  police,  as  was  shown  at  the  Parnell  trial. 
Everybody  remembers  how  much  of  such  activity  was 
displayed  in  Belgium  during  the  eighties  by  that  prince 
of  scoundrels,  Pourbaix.  Even  the  Minister  Bernaard 
himself  was  compelled  to  admit  before  the  Parliament 
that  Pourbaix  was  paid  to  arrange  assassinations  in  order 
to  justify  violent  persecutions  of  the  Social  Democracy. 
Likewise  was  Baron  von  Ungern-Sternberg,  nicknamed 
the  'bomb-baron,'  unmasked  as  a  police  agent  at  the  trial 
of  the  Luttich  Anarchists. 

"And  then — our  own  good  friends  at  the  time  of  the 
[anti-]  Socialist  law.  About  them  I  myself  could  tell 
you  some  interesting  stories,  for  I  was  among  those  who 
helped  to  unmask  them.  There  is  Schroeder-Brennwald, 
of  Zurich,  the  chap  who  was  receiving  from  Molken- 
markt,  through  police  counsellor  Krueger,  a  monthly  sal- 
ary of  at  first  200  and  then  250  marks.  At  every  meet- 
ing in  Zurich  this  Schroeder  was  stirring  up  people  and 
putting  them  up  to  commit  acts  of  violence.  But  to 
guard  against  expulsion  from  Switzerland  by  the  authori- 
ties of  that  country,  he  first  acquired  citizenship  in 
Switzerland,  presumably  by  means  of  funds  furnished  by 
the  police  of  Prussia.  During  the  summer  of  1883 
Schroeder  and  the  police-Anarchist  Kaufman  called  and 
held  in  Zurich  a  conference  participated  in  by  thirteen 
persons.  Schroeder  acted  as  chairman.  At  that  confer- 
ence plans  were  laid  for  the  assassinations  which  were 
later  committed  in  Vienna,  Stuttgart,  and  Strassburg  by 
Stellmacher,  Kammerer,  and  Kumitzsch.  I  am  not  in- 
formed that  these  unscrupulous  scoundrels,  although  they 
were  in  the  service  of  the  police,  had  informed  the  police 


n6      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

commissioner  that  those  murders  were  being  contem- 
plated. .  .  .  Men  like  Stellmacher  and  Kammerer 
paid  for  their  acts  with  their  lives  on  the  gallows.  When 
[Johann]  Most  was  serving  a  term  in  a  prison  in  Eng- 
land, this  same  police  spy  Schroeder  had  Most's  Trei- 
heit'  published  at  Schaffhausen,  Switzerland,  at  his  own 
expense.  The  money  surely  did  not  come  out  of  his  own 
pocket. 

"That  was  a  glorious  time  when  [we  unmasked  this 
Schroeder  and  the  other  police  organizer  of  plots,  Haupt, 
to  whom]   the  police  counsellor  Krueger  wrote  that  he 
knew  the  next  attempt  on  the  life  of  the  Czar  of  Russia 
would  be  arranged  in  Geneva,  and  he  should  send  in  re- 
ports.   Was  this  demand  not  remarkable  in  the  highest 
degree  ?    And  now  Herr  von  Ehrenberg,  the  former  colo- 
nel of  artillery  of  Baden !     .     .     .    This  fellow  was  un- 
questionably for  good  reason  suspected  of  having  be- 
trayed to  the  General  Staff  of  Italy  the  fortifications  of 
Switzerland  at  St.  Gotthard.     When  his  residence  was 
searched  it  was  brought  to  light  that  Herr  von  Ehren- 
berg worked  also  in  the  employ  of  the  Prussian  police. 
He  gave  regularly  written  reports  of  conversations  which 
he  claimed  to  have  had  with  our  comrades,  including  me. 
Only  in  those  alleged  conversations  the  characters  were 
reversed.    We  were  represented  as  advocating  the  most 
reckless  criminal  plans,  which  in  reality  he  himself  sug- 
gested and  defended,  while  he  pictured  himself  in  those 
reports   as   opposing   the   plans.     .     .     .    What   would 
have  happened  if  some  day  those  reports  had  fallen  into 
the  hands  of  certain  persons — and  that  was  undoubtedly 
the  purpose — and,  if  accused,  we  had  no  witnesses  to 
prove  the  spy  committed  perfidy  ?    Thus,  for  instance,  he 
attempted  to  convince  me — but  in  his  records  claimed 
that  it  was  I  who  proposed  it — that  it  would  be  but 


SEEKING  THE  CAUSES  1 17 

child's  play  to  find  out  the  residences  of  the  higher  mili- 
tary officers  in  all  the  greater  cities  of  Germany,  then,  in 
one  night,  send  out  our  best  men  and  have  all  those  offi- 
cers murdered  simultaneously.  In  four  articles  pub- 
lished in  the  'Arbeiterstimme,'  of  Zurich,  he  explained  in 
a  truly  classical  manner  how  to  conduct  a  modern  street 
battle,  what  to  do  to  get  the  best  of  artillery  and  cav- 
alry. At  meetings  he  urged  the  collection  of  funds  to 
buy  arms  for  our  people.  As  soon  as  war  broke  out  with 
France  our  comrades  from  Switzerland,  according  to 
him,  should  break  into  Baden  and  Wuerttemberg,  should 
there  tear  up  the  tracks  and  confiscate  the  contents  of  the 
postal  and  railroad  treasuries.  And  this  man,  who  urged 
me  to  do  all  that,  was,  as  I  said,  in  the  employ  of  the 
Prussian  police. 

"Another  police  preacher  and  organizer  of  violent 
plots  was  that  well-known  Friedeman  who  was  driven 
out  of  Berlin,  and,  at  the  gatherings  of  comrades  in 
Zurich,  appealed  to  them,  in  prose  and  poetry,  to  commit 
acts  of  violence.  A  certain  Weiss,  a  journeyman  tin- 
smith, was  arrested  in  the  vicinity  of  Basel  for  having 
put  up  posters  in  which  the  deeds  of  Kammerer  and 
Stellmacher  were  glorified.  He,  too,  was  in  the  employ 
of  the  German  police,  as  was  afterward  established  dur- 
ing the  court  proceedings. 

"A  certain  Schmidt,  who  had  to  disappear  from  Dres- 
den on  account  of  his  crooked  conduct,  came  to  Zurich 
and  urged  the  establishment  of  a  special  fund  for  assassi- 
nations, contributing  twenty  francs  to  start  the  fund. 
Correspondence  which  he  had  carried  on  with  Chief  of 
Police  Weller,  of  Dresden,  and  which  later  fell  into  our 
hands,  proved  that  he  was  in  the  employ  of  the  police, 
whom  he  kept  informed  of  his  actions.  And  then  the 
unmasked  secret   police  agent   Ihring-Mahlow,   here  in 


n8       VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

Berlin,  who  announced  that  he  was  prepared  to  teach  the 
manufacture  of  explosives,  for  'the  parliamentary  way 
is  too  slow.'  "  (25) 

Here  certainly  is  a  great  source  of  violence  and  crime, 
and,  in  view  of  such  revelations,  no  one  can  be  sure  that 
any  anarchist  outrage  is  wholly  voluntary  and  altogether 
free  from  the  manipulation  of  the  secret  police.     With 
agents  provocateurs  swarming  over  the  movement  and 
working  upon  the  minds  of  the  weak,  the  susceptible,  and 
the  criminal,  there  is  reason  to  believe  that  their  influ- 
ence in  the  tragedies  of  terrorism  is   far  greater  than 
will  ever  be  known.    To  discredit  starving  men  on  strike, 
to  defeat  socialists  in  an  election,  to  promote  a  political 
intrigue,  to  throw  the  entire  legislature  into  the  hands  of 
the  reaction,  to  conceal  corruption,  or  to  take  the  public 
mind  from  too  intently  watching  the  nefarious  schemes 
of  a  political-financial  conspiracy — for  all  these  and  a 
multitude  of  other  purposes  thousands  of  secret  police 
agents  are  at  work.     The  sordid  facts  of  this  infamous 
commerce  are  no  longer  in  doubt,  and  one  wonders  how 
the  anarchists  can  delude  themselves  into  the  belief  that 
they  are  serving  the  weak  and  lowly  when  they  commit 
exactly  the  same  crimes  that  professional  assassins  are 
hired  to  commit.    This  certainly  is  madness.    To  be  thus 
used  by  their  bitterest  enemies,  the  police  and  the  State, 
to  serve  thus  voluntarily  the  forces  of  intrigue,  of  re- 
action, and  of  tyranny — surely  nothing  can  be  so  near  to 
unreason  as  this.     When  Bismarck's  personal  organ  de- 
clared again  and  again,  "There  is  nothing  left  to  be  done 
but  to  provoke  the  social  democrats  to  commit  acts  of 
despair,  to  draw  them  out  into  the  open  street,  and  there 
to  shoot  them  down,"  (26)  a  reasoning  opponent  would 
have  seen  that  this  was  just  what  he  would  not  allow 
himself  to  be  drawn  into.     Yet  Bismarck  hardly  says 


SEEKING  THE  CAUSES 


119 


this  and  sets  his  police  to  work  before  the  anarchist 
freely,  voluntarily,  and  with  tremendous  exaltation  of 
spirit  attempts  to  carry  it  out. 

Strange  to  say,  the  desire  of  the  powerful  to  promote 
anarchy  seems  to  be  well  enough  understood  by  the  an- 
archists themselves.  Kropotkin,  in  his  "Memoirs,"  tells 
of  two  cases  where  police  agents  were  sent  to  him  with 
money  to  help  establish  anarchist  papers,  and  there  was 
hardly  a  moment  of  his  revolutionary  career  when  there 
were  not  police  agents  about  him.  Emma  Goldman  also 
appreciates  the  fact  that  the  police  are  always  ready  to 
lend  a  hand  in  anarchist  outrages.  "For  a  number  of 
years,"  she  says,  "acts  of  violence  had  been  committed 
in  Spain,  for  which  the  anarchists  were  held  responsible, 
hounded  like  wild  beasts,  and  thrown  into  prison.  Later 
it  was  disclosed  that  the  perpetrators  of  these  acts  were 
not  anarchists,  but  members  of  the  police  department. 
The  scandal  became  so  widespread  that  the  conservative 
Spanish  papers  demanded  the  apprehension  and  punish- 
ment of  the  gang  leader,  Juan  Rull,  who  was  subse- 
quently condemned  to  death  and  executed.  The  sensa- 
tional evidence,  brought  to  light  during  the  trial,  forced 
Police  Inspector  Momento  to  exonerate  completely  the 
anarchists  from  any  connection  with  the  acts  committed 
during  a  long  period.  This  resulted  in  the  dismissal  of  a 
number  of  police  officials,  among  them  Inspector  Tres- 
sols,  who,  in  revenge,  disclosed  the  fact  that  behind  the 
gang  of  police  bomb-throwers  were  others  of  far  higher 
position,  who  provided  them  with  funds  and  protected 
them.  This  is  one  of  the  many  striking  examples  of  how 
anarchist  conspiracies  are  manufactured."  (27)  With 
knowledge  such  as  this,  is  it  possible  that  a  sane  mind 
can  encourage  the  despairing  to  undertake  riots  and  in- 
surrections?   Yet  when  we  turn  to  the  anarchists  for  our 


120      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

answer,  they  tell  us  "that  the  accumulated  forces  in  our 
social  and  economic  life,  culminating  in  a  political  act  of 
violence,  are  similar  to  the  terrors  of  the  atmosphere, 
manifested  in  storm  and  lightning.  To  thoroughly  ap- 
preciate the  truth  of  this  view,  one  must  feel  intensely 
the  indignity  of  our  social  wrongs ;  one's  very  being 
must  throb  with  the  pain,  the  sorrow,  the  despair  mil- 
lions of  people  are  daily  made  to  endure.  Indeed,  unless 
we  have  become  a  part  of  humanity,  we  cannot  even 
faintly  understand  the  just  indignation  that  accumulates 
in  a  human  soul,  the  burning,  surging  passion  that  makes 
the  storm  inevitable."  (28)  Such  explosions  of  rage 
one  would  expect  from  the  unreasonable  and  the  child- 
like. They  are  bursts  of  passion  that  end  in  the  knocking 
of  one's  head  against  a  stone  wall.  This  may  in  truth  be 
the  psychology  of  the  violent,  yet  it  cannot  be  the  psychol- 
ogy of  a  reasoning  mind.  This  may  explain  the  action  of 
those  who  have  lost  all  control  over  themselves  or  even 
the  action  of  a  class  that  has  not  advanced  beyond  the 
stages  of  futile  outbursts  of  passion,  of  aimless  and  sui- 
cidal violence,  and  of  self-destructive  rage.  But  it  is  in- 
credible that  it  should  be  considered  by  anyone  as  rea- 
sonable or  intelligent,  or,  least  of  all,  revolutionary. 

Probably  still  other  causes  of  terrorism  exist,  but  cer- 
tainly the  chief  are  those  above  mentioned.  The  writ- 
ings of  Bakounin,  Nechayeff,  Kropotkin,  and  Most;  the 
miserable  conditions  which  surround  the  life  of  a  multi- 
tude of  impoverished  people ;  the  often  savage  repression 
of  any  attempts  on  the  part  of  the  workers  to  improve 
their  conditions ;  corrupt  courts  and  parliaments  and  un- 
just laws;  a  false  conception  of  ethics;  a  high-wrought 
nervous  tension  combined  with  compassion ;  the  egocen- 
tric philosophy  which  deifies  the  individual  and  would 
press  its  claims  even  to  the  destruction  of  all  else  in  the 


SEEKING  THE  CAUSES  12 1 

world ;  these  are  no  doubt  the  chief  underlying  causes  of 
the  terrorism  of  the  last  forty  years.  Yet,  as  I  have  said, 
there  is  one  force  making  for  terrorism  that  throws  a 
confusing  light  on  the  whole  series  of  tragedies.  Why 
should  the  governments  of  Europe  subsidize  anarchy? 
Why  should  their  secret  police  encourage  outrages,  plant 
dynamite,  and  incite  the  criminal  elements  to  become 
anarchists,  and  in  that  guise  to  burn,  pillage,  and  com- 
mit murder?  Why  should  that  which  assumes  to  stand 
for  law  and  order  work  to  the  destruction  of  law  and 
order?  What  is  it  that  leads  the  corrupt,  vicious,  and 
reactionary  elements  in  the  official  world  to  turn  thus 
to  its  use  even  anarchy  and  terrorism  ?  What  end  do  the 
governments  of  Europe  seek? 

I  have  already  suggested  the  answers  to  the  above 
questions,  but  they  will  not  be  understood  by  the  reader 
unless  he  realizes  that  throughout  all  of  last  century  the 
democratic  movement  has  been  to  the  privileged  classes 
the  most  menacing  spectacle  imaginable.  Again  and 
again  it  arose  to  challenge  existing  society.  In  some 
form,  however  vague,  it  lay  back  of  every  popular  move- 
ment. At  moments  the  powerful  seemed  actually  to  fear 
that  it  was  on  the  point  of  taking  possession  of  the 
world,  and  repeatedly  it  has  been  pushed  back,  crushed, 
subdued,  almost  obliterated  by  their  repressive  measures. 
Yet  again  and  again  it  arose  responsive  to  the  actual 
needs  of  the  time,  and  became  toward  the  end  of  the 
century  one  of  the  most  impressive  movements  the  world 
has  ever  known.  Filled  with  idealism  for  a  new  social 
order,  and  determined  to  change  fundamentally  existing 
conditions,  the  working  class  has  fought  onward  and  up- 
ward toward  a  world  State  and  a  socialized  industrial 
life.  There  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  amazing  growth  of 
the  modern  socialist  movement  has  terrified  the  powers 


I22      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

of  industrial  and  political  tyranny.  To  them  it  is  an 
incomparable  menace,  and  superhuman  efforts  have  been 
made  to  turn  it  from  its  path.  They  have  endeavored  to 
divide  it,  to  misinterpret  it,  to  divert  it,  to  corrupt  it, 
and  the  greatest  of  all  their  efforts  has  been  made  to- 
ward forcing  it  to  become  a  movement  of  terrorists,  in 
order  ultimately  to  discredit  and  destroy  it.  "We  have 
always  been  of  the  opinion,"  declared  an  unknown  oppo- 
nent of  socialism,  "that  it  takes  the  devil  to  drive  out 
Beelzebub  and  that  socialism  must  be  fought  with  an- 
archy. As  a  corn  louse  and  similar  insects  are  driven 
out  by  the  help  of  other  insects  that  devour  them  and 
their  eggs,  so  the  Government  should  cultivate  and  rear 
anarchists  in  the  principal  nests  of  socialism,  leaving  it 
to  the  anarchists  to  destroy  socialism.  The  anarchists 
will  do  that  work  more  effectively  than  either  police  or 
district  attorneys."  (29)  Has  this  been  the  chief  motive 
in  helping  to  keep  terrorism  alive  ? 


PART   II 


STRUGGLES  WITH  VIOLENCE 


KARL    MARX 


CHAPTER   VII 

THE   BIRTH    OF   MODERN    SOCIALISM 

While  terrorism  was  running  its  tragic  course,  the  so- 
cialists grew  from  a  tiny  sect  into  a  world-wide  move- 
ment. And,  as  terrorist  acts  were  the  expression  of  cer- 
tain uncontrollably  rebellious  spirits,  so  cooperatives, 
trade  unions,  and  labor  parties  arose  in  response  to  the 
conscious  and  constructive  effort  of  the  masses.  As  a 
matter  of  fact,  the  terrorist  groups  never  exercised  any 
considerable  influence  over  the  actual  labor  movement, 
except  for  a  brief  period  in  Spain  and  America.  In- 
deed, they  did  not  in  the  least  understand  that  move- 
ment. The  followers  of  Bakounin  were  largely  young 
enthusiasts  from  the  middle  class,  who  were  referred  to 
scornfully  at  the  time  as  "lawyers  without  cases,  physi- 
cians without  patients  and  knowledge,  students  of  bil- 
liards, commercial  travelers,  and  others."  (i)  Yet  it 
cannot  be  denied  that  violence  has  played,  and  still  in  a 
measure  plays,  a  part  in  the  labor  movement.  I  mean 
the  violence  of  sheer  desperation.  It  rises  and  falls  in 
direct  relation  to  the  lawlessness,  the  repression,  and  the 
tyranny  of  the  governments.  Furthermore,  where  labor 
organizations  are  weakest  and  the  masses  most  ignorant 
and  desperate,  the  very  helplessness  of  the  workers  leads 
them  into  that  violence.  This  is  made  clear  enough  by 
the  historic  fact  that  in  the  early  days  of  the  modern 
industrial  system  nearly  every  strike  of  the  unorganized 

125 


126      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

laborers   was  accompanied  by  riots,   machine-breaking, 
and  assaults  upon  men  and  property. 

No  small  part  of  this  early  violence  was  directly  due 
to  the  brutal  opposition  of  society  to  every  form  of  labor 
organization.     The  workers  were  fought  violently,  and 
they  answered  violence  with  violence.     It  must  not  be 
forgotten  that  the  trade  unions  and  the  socialist  parties 
grew,  in  spite  of  every  menace,  in  the  very  teeth  of  that 
which  forbade  them,  and  under  the  eye  of  that  which 
sought  to  destroy  them.    And,  like  other  living  things  in 
the  midst  of  a  hostile  environment,  they  covered  them- 
selves with  spurs  to  ward  off  the  enemy.     The  early 
movements  of  labor  were  marked  by  a  sullen,  bitter,  and 
destructive   spirit;   and   some  of   the  much   persecuted 
propagandists    of    early   trade   unionism    and    socialism 
thought  that  "implacable  destruction"  was  preferable  to 
the  tyranny  which  the  workers  then  suffered.     Not  the 
philosophy,  but  the  rancor  of  Bakounin,  of  Nechayeff, 
and  of  Most  represented,  three-quarters  of  a  century  ago, 
the  feeling  of  great  masses  of  workingmen.     Riots,  in- 
surrections, machine-breaking,  incendiarism,  pillage,  and 
even  murder  were  then  more  truly  expressive  of  the 
attitude  of  certain  sections  of  the  brutalized  poor  toward 
the  society  which  had  disinherited  them^han  most  of  us 
to-day  realize.     In  every  industrial  center,  previous  to 
1850,  the  working-class  movement,  such  as  it  was,  yielded 
repeatedly  to  self-exhausting  expressions  of  blind  and 
sullen  rage.    The  resentment  of  the  workers  was  deep, 
and,  without  program  or  philosophy,  a  spirit  of  destruc- 
tion often  ran  riot  in  nearly  every  movement   of  the 
workers. 

During  the  first  fifty  years,  then,  of  last  century,  little 
building  was  done.  A  mob  spirit  prevailed,  and  the  great 
body  of  toilers  was  divided  into  innumerable  bands,  who 


THE  BIRTH  OF  MODERN  SOCIALISM  127 

fought  their  battles  without  aim,  and,  after  weeks  of 
rioting,  left  nothing  behind  them.  Toward  the  middle 
of  the  century  the  real  building  of  the  labor  movement 
commenced.  In  every  country  men  soberly  and  seriously 
set  to  work,  and  everywhere  throughout  the  entire  indus- 
trial world  the  foundations  were  laid  for  the  great  move- 
ment that  exists  to-day.  Yet  the  present  world-wide 
movement,  so  harmonious  in  its  principles  and  methods 
and  so  united  in  doctrines,  could  not  have  been  all  that 
it  is  had  there  not  come  to  its  aid  in  its  most  critical  and 
formative  period  several  of  the  ablest  and  best-schooled 
minds  of  Europe.  At  the  period  when  the  workers  were 
finding  their  feet  and  beginning  their  task  of  organization 
on  a  large  scale,  there  was  also  in  Europe  much  revolu- 
tionary activity  in  ''intellectual"  circles.  The  forties  was 
a  germinating  period  for  many  new  social  and  economic 
theories.  In  France,  Germany,  and  England  there  were 
many  groups  discussing  with  heat  and  passion  every  the- 
ory of  trade  unionism,  anarchism,  and  socialism.  On 
the  whole,  they  were  middle-class  "intellectuals,"  bat- 
tling in  their  sectarian  circles  over  the  evils  of  our  eco- 
nomic life,  the  problems  of  society,  and  the  relations  be- 
tween the  classes.  Suddenly  the  revolution  was  upon 
them — the  moment  which  they  all  instinctively  felt  was 
at  hand — but,  when  it  came,  most  of  them  were  able  to 
play  no  forceful  part  in  it.  It  was  a  movement  of  vast 
masses,  over  which  the  social  revolutionists  had  little  in- 
fluence, and  the  various  groups  found  themselves  inca- 
pable of  any  really  effective  action.  To  be  sure,  many 
of  those  seeking  a  social  revolution  played  a  creditable 
part  in  the  uprisings  throughout  Europe  during  '48  and 
'49,  but  the  time  had  not  yet  arrived  for  the  working 
classes  to  achieve  any  striking  reforms  of  their  own.  The 
only  notable  result  of  the  period,  so  far  as  the  social 


J 
128      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

revolutionary  element  was  concerned,  was  that  it  lost 
once  again,  nearly  everywhere,  its  press,  its  liberty  of 
speech,  and  its  right  of  association.  It  was  driven  under- 
ground; but  there  germinated,  nevertheless,  in  the  innu- 
merable secret  societies,  some  of  the  most  important  prin- 
ciples and  doctrines  upon  which  the  international  labor 
movement  was  later  to  be  founded. 

In  France  socialist  theories  had  never  been  wholly 
friendless  from  the  time  of  the  great  Revolution.  The 
memory  of  the  enrages  of  1793  and  of  Babeuf  and  his 
conspiracy  of  1795  had  been  kept  green  by  Buonarotti 
and  Marechal.  The  ruling  classes  had  very  cunningly 
lauded  liberty  and  fraternity,  but  they  rarely  mentioned 
the  struggle  for  equality,  which,  of  course,  appeared  to 
them  as  a  regrettable  and  most  dangerous  episode  in  the 

Ml 

great  Revolution.  Yet,  despite  that  fact,  this  early  strug- 
gle for  economic  equality  had  never  been  wholly  forgot- 
ten. Besides,  there  were  Fourier  and  Saint-Simon,  who, 
with  very  great  scholarly  attainments,  had  rigidly 
analyzed  existing  society,  exposed  its  endless  disorders, 
and  advocated  an  entire  social  transformation.  There 
were  also  Considerant,  Leroux,  Vidal,  Pecqueur,  and 
Cabet.  All  of  these  able  and  gifted  men  had  kept  the  so- 
cial question  ever  to  the  front,  while  Louis  Blanc  and 
Blanqui  had  actually  introduced  into  politics  the  princi- 
ples of  socialism.  Blanqui  was  an  amazing  character. 
He  was  an  incurable,  habitual  insurrectionist,  who  came 
to  be  called  Venferme  because  so  much  of  his  life  was 
spent  in  prison.*  The  authorities  again  and  again  re- 
leased him,  only  to  hear  the  next  instant  that  he  was 
leading  a  mob  to  storm  the  citadels  of  the  Government. 
His  life  was  a  series  of  unsuccessful  assaults  upon  au- 

*  The  dramatic  story  of  his  life  is  wonderfully  told  in  L'En- 
ferme  by  Gustave  Geffroy.     (Paris,  1904.) 


THE  BIRTH  OF  MODERN  SOCIALISM  129 

thority,  launched  in  the  hope  that,  if  the  working  class 
should  once  install  itself  in  power,  it  would  reorganize 
society  on  socialist  lines.  He  was  a  man  of  the  street, 
who  had  only  to  appear  to  find  an  army  of  thousands 
ready  to  follow  him.  Blanqui  used  to  say — according 
to  Kropotkin — that  there  were  in  Paris  fifty  thousand 
men  ready  at  any  moment  for  an  insurrection.  Again 
and  again  he  arose  like  an  apparition  among  them,  and  on 
one  occasion,  at  the  head  of  two  hundred  thousand  peo- 
ple, he  offered  the  dictatorship  of  France  to  Louis  Blanc. 
The  latter  was  an  altogether  different  person.  His  stage 
was  the  parliamentary  one.  He  was  a  powerful  orator, 
who,  throughout  the  forties,  was  preaching  his  practical 
program  of  social  reform — the  right  to  work,  the  organi- 
zation of  labor,  and  the  final  extinction  of  capitalism  by 
the  growth  of  cooperative  production  fostered  by  the 
State.  In  1848  he  played  a  great  role,  and  all  Europe 
listened  with  astonishment  to  the  revolutionary  proposals 
of  this  man  who,  for  a  few  months,  occupied  the  most 
powerful  position  in  France.  At  the  same  time  Prou- 
dhon  was  developing  the  principles  of  anarchism  and 
earning  everlasting  fame  as  the  father  of  that  philoso- 
phy. In  truth,  the  whole  gamut  of  socialist  ideas  and 
the  entire  range  of  socialist  methods  had  been  agitated 
and  debated  in  peace  and  in  war  for  half  a  century  in 
France. 

In  England  the  same  questions  had  disturbed  all  classes 
for  nearly  fifty  years.  There  had  been  no  great  revolu- 
tionary period,  but  from  the  beginning  of  the  nineteenth 
century  to  the  extinction  of  Chartism  in  1848  every  doc- 
trine of  trade  unionism,  syndicalism,  anarchism,  and  so- 
cialism had  been  debated  passionately  by  groups  of 
workingmen  and  their  friends.  The  principles  and 
methods  of  trade  unionism  were  being  worked  out  on  the 


130      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

actual  battlefield,  amid  riots,  strikes,  machine-breaking, 
and  incendiarism.  Instinctively  the  masses  were  asso- 
ciating for  mutual  protection  and,  almost  unconsciously, 
working  out  by  themselves  programs  of  action.  Never- 
theless, Joseph  Hume,  Francis  Place,  Robert  Owen,  and 
a  number  of  other  brilliant  men  were  lending  powerful 
intellectual  aid  to  the  workers  in  their  actual  struggle.  A 
group  of  radical  economists  was  also  defending  the 
claims  of  labor.  Charles  Hall,  William  Thompson,  John 
Gray,  Thomas  Hodgskin,  and  J.  F.  Bray  were  all  seeking 
to  find  the  economic  causes  of  the  wrongs  suffered  by  la- 
bor and  endeavoring,  in  some  manner,  to  devise  remedies 
for  the  immense  suffering  endured  by  the  working 
classes.  Together  with  Robert  Owen,  a  number  of  them 
were  planning  labor  exchanges,  voluntary  communities, 
and  even  at  one  time  the  entire  reorganization  of  the 
world  through  the  trade  unions.  In  this  ferment  the  co- 
operative movement  also  had  its  birth.  The  Rochdale 
Pioneers  began  to  work  out  practically  some  of  the 
cooperative  ideas  of  Robert  Owen.  With  £28  a  pathetic 
beginning  was  made  that  has  led  to  the  immensely  rich 
cooperative  movement  of  to-day.  Furthermore,  the 
Chartists  were  leading  a  vast  political  movement  of  the 
workers.  In  support  of  the  suffrage  and  of  parliamentary 
representation  for  workingmen,  a  wonderful  group  of 
orators  and  organizers  carried  on  in  the  thirties  and  for- 
ties an  immense  agitation.  William  Lovett,  Feargus 
O'Connor,  Joseph  Rayner  Stephens,  Ernest  Jones, 
Thomas  Cooper,  and  James  Bronterre  O'Brien  were 
among  the  notable  and  gifted  men  who  were  then  preach- 
ing throughout  all  England  revolutionary  and  socialist 
ideas.  Such  questions  as  the  abolition  of  inheritances, 
the  nationalization  of  land,  the  right  of  labor  to  the  full 
product  of  its  toil,  the  necessity  of  breaking  down  class 


THE  BIRTH  OF  MODERN  SOCIALISM 


131 


control  of  Parliament — these  and  other  subversive  ideas 
were  germinating  in  all  sections  of  the  English  labor 
movement.  It  was  a  heroic  period — altogether  the  most 
heroic  period  in  the  annals  of  toil — in  which  the  most 
advanced  and  varied  revolutionary  ideas  were  hurtling 
in  the  air.  The  causes  of  the  ruin  that  overcame  this 
magnificent  beginning  of  a  revolutionary  working-class 
movement  cannot  be  dwelt  upon  here.  Quarrels  between 
the  leaders,  the  incoherence  of  their  policies,  and  divi- 
sions over  the  use  of  violence  utterly  wrecked  a  move- 
ment that  anticipated  by  thirty  years  the  social  democracy 
of  Germany.  The  tragic  fiasco  in  1848  was  the  begin- 
ning of  an  appalling  working-class  reaction  from  years  of 
popular  excesses  and  mob  intoxications,  from  which  the 
wiser  leadership  of  the  German  movement  was  careful  to 
steer  clear.  And,  after  '48,  solemn  and  serious  men  set- 
tled down  to  the  quiet  building  of  trade  unions  and 
cooperatives.  Revolutionary  ideas  were  put  aside,  and 
everywhere  in  England  the  responsible  men  of  the  move- 
ment were  pleading  with  the  masses  to  confine  them- 
selves to  the  practical  work  of  education  and  organiza- 
tion. 

Although  Germany  was  far  behind  England  in  indus- 
trial development  and,  consequently,  also  in  working- 
class  organization,  the  beginnings  of  a  labor  and  socialist 
movement  were  discernible.  A  brief  but  delightful 
description  of  the  early  communist  societies  is  given  by 
Engels  in  his  introduction  to  the  Revelations  sur  le 
Proces  des  Communist es.  As  early  as  1836  there  were 
secret  societies  in  Germany  discussing  socialist  ideas.  The 
"League  of  the  Just"  became  later  the  "League  of  the 
Righteous,"  and  that  eventually  developed  into  the 
"Communist  League."  The  membership  cards  read,  "All 
men  are  brothers."    Karl  Schapper,  Heinrich  Bauer,  and 


132      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

Joseph  Moll,  all  workingmen,  were  among  those  who 
made  an  imposing  impression  upon  Engels.  Even  more 
notable  was  Weitling,  a  tailor,  who  traveled  all  over  Ger- 
many preaching  a  mixture  of  Christian  communism  and 
French  Utopian  socialism.  He  was  a  simple-hearted 
missionary,  delivering  his  evangel.  "The  World  As  It 
Is  and  As  It  Might  Be"  was  the  moving  title  of  one 
of  his  books  that  attracted  to  him  not  only  many  fol- 
lowers among  the  workers,  but  also  notable  men  from 
other  classes.  Most  of  the  communists  were  of  course 
always  under  suspicion,  and  many  of  them  were  forced 
out  of  their  own  countries.  As  a  result,  a  large  number 
of  foreigners — Scandinavians,  Dutch,  Hungarians,  Ger- 
mans, and  Italians — found  themselves  in  Paris  and  in 
London,  and  astonished  each  other  by  the  similarity  of 
their  views.  All  Europe  in  this  period  was  discussing 
very  much  the  same  things,  and  not  only  the  more  intelli- 
gent among  the  workers  but  the  more  idealistic  among 
the  youth  from  the  universities  were  in  revolt,  discussing 
fervently  republican,  socialist,  communist,  and  anarchist 
ideas.  In  "Young  Germany."  George  Brandes  gives  a 
thrilling  account  of  the  spiritual  and  intellectual  fer- 
ment that  was  stirring  in  all  parts  of  the  fatherland  dur- 
ing the  entire  forties.  (2) 

It  was  in  this  agitated  period  that  Marx  and  Engels, 
both  mere  youths,  began  to  press  their  ideas  in  revolu- 
tionary circles.  They  met  each  other  in  Paris  in  1844, 
and  there  began  their  lifelong  cooperative  labors.  En- 
gels, although  a  German,  was  living  in  England,  occu- 
pied in  his  father's  cotton  business  at  Manchester.  He 
had  taken  a  deep  interest  in  the  condition  of  the  laboring 
classes,  and  had  followed  carefully  the  terrible  and  often 
bloody  struggles  that  so  frequently  broke  out  between 
capital  and  labor  in  England  during  the  thirties  and  for- 


THE  BIRTH  OF  MODERN  SOCIALISM  133 

ties.  Arriving  by  an  entirely  different  route,  he  had 
come  to  opinions  almost  identical  with  those  of  Marx; 
and  the  next  year  he  persuaded  Marx  to  visit  the  factory 
districts  of  Lancashire,  in  order  to  acquaint  himself  actu- 
ally with  the  enraged  struggle  then  being  fought  between 
masters  and  men.  Engels  had  not  gone  to  a  university, 
although  he  seems  somehow  to  have  acquired,  despite  his 
business  cares  and  active  association  with  the  men  and 
movements  of  his  time,  a  thorough  education.  On  the 
other  hand,  Marx  was  a  university  man,  having  studied 
at  Jena,  Bonn,  and  Berlin.  Like  most  of  the  serious 
young  men  of  the  period,  Marx  was  a  devoted  Hegelian-. 
When  his  university  days  were  over,  he  became  the  edi- 
tor of  the  Rheinische  Zeitung  of  Cologne,  but  at  the  age 
of  twenty-four  he  found  his  paper  suppressed  because 
of  his  radical  utterances.  He  went  to  Paris,  only  to  be 
expelled  in  1845.     He  found  a  refuge  in  Belgium  until 

1848,  when  the  Government  evidently  thought  it  wise  that 
he  should  move  on.  Shortly  after,  he  returned  to  Ger- 
many to  take  up  his  editorial  work  once  more,  but  in 

1849,  his  Neue  Rheinische  Zeitung  was  suppressed,  and 
he  was  forced  to  return  to  Paris.  The  authorities,  not 
wishing  him  there,  sent  him  off  to  London,  where  he  re- 
mained the  rest  of  his  life.  By  the  irony  of  fate,  even  the 
governments  of  Europe  seemed  to  be  conspiring  to  force 
Marx  to  become  the  best  equipped  man  of  his  time.  To 
the  leisure  and  travel  enforced  upon  him  by  the  Euro- 
pean governments  was  due  in  no  small  measure  his  long 
schooling  in  economic  theory,  revolutionary  political 
movements,  and  working-class  methods  of  action.  Both 
he  and  Engels  penetrated  into  every  nest  of  discontent. 
They  came  personally  in  touch  with  every  group  of  dissi- 
dents. They  spent  many  weary  but  invaluable  weeks  in 
the  greatest  libraries  of  Europe,  with  the  result  that  they 


134      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

became  thoroughly  schooled  in  philosophy,  economics, 
science,  and  languages.  They  pursued,  to  the  minutest 
detail,  with  an  inexhaustible  thirst,  the  theories  not  only 
of  the  "authorities"  but  also  of  nearly  every  obscure  so- 
cialist, radical,  and  revolutionist  in  England,  France, 
Russia,  and  Germany. 

In  Brussels,  Paris,  and  London,  around  the  forties,  a 
number  of  brilliant  minds  seemed  somehow  or  other  to 
come  frequently  in  contact  with  each  other.  Many  of 
them  had  been  driven  out  of  their  own  countries,  and, 
as  exiles  abroad,  they  had  ample  leisure  to  plan  their 
great  conspiracies  or  to  debate  their  great  theories.  Some 
of  the  notable  radicals  of  the  period  were  Heine,  Freil- 
igrath,  Herwegh,  Willich,  Kinkel,  Weitling,  Bakounin, 
Ruge,  Ledru-Rollin,  Blanc,  Blanqui,  Cabet,  Proudhon, 
Ernest  Jones,  Eccarius,  Marx,  Engels,  and  Liebknecht; 
and  many  of  them  came  together  from  time  to  time  and, 
in  great  excitement  and  passion,  fought  as  "Roman  to 
Roman"  over  their  panaceas.  Marx  and  Engels  knew 
most  of  them  and  spent  innumerable  hours,  not  infre- 
quently entire  days  and  nights,  at  a  sitting,  in  their  intel- 
lectual battles. 

It  was  a  most  fortunate  thing  for  Marx  that  the 
French  Government  should  have  driven  him  in  1849  to 
London.  "Capital"  might  never  have  been  written  had 
he  not  been  forced  to  study  for  a  long  period  the  first 
land  in  all  Europe  in  which  modern  capitalism  had  ob- 
tained a  footing.  On  his  earlier  visit  in  1845  ne  nad 
spent  a  few  weeks  with  Engels  in  the  great  factory  cen- 
ters, and  he  had  been  deeply  impressed  with  this  new 
industrialism  and  no  less,  of  course,  with  the  English 
labor  movement.  Nothing  to  compare  with  it  then  ex- 
isted in  France  or  Germany.  As  early  as  1840  many  of 
the  trades  were  well  organized,  and  repeated  efforts  had 


THE  BIRTH  OF  MODERN  SOCIALISM  135 

been  made  to  bring  them  together  into  a  national  fed- 
eration. How  thoroughly  Engels  knew  this  movement 
and  its  varied  struggles  to  better  the  status  of  labor  is 
shown  in  his  book,  "The  Condition  of  the  Working  Class 
in  England  in  1844."  How  thoroughly  and  fundamen- 
tally Marx  later  came  to  know  not  only  the  actual  work- 
ing-class movement,  but  every  economic  theory  from 
Adam  Smith  to  John  Stuart  Mill,  and  every  insurgent 
economist  and  political  theorist  from  William  Godwin 
to  Bronterre  O'Brien,  is  shown  in  "Capital."  In  fact, 
not  a  single  phase  of  insurgent  thought  seemed  to  escape 
Marx  and  Engels,  nor  any  trace  of  revolt  against  the 
existing  order,  whether  political  or  industrial.  In  Ger- 
many they  were  schooled  in  philosophy  and  science ;  in 
France  they  found  themselves  in  a  most  amazing  fer- 
mentation of  revolutionary  spirit  and  idealism ;  and  in 
England  they  studied  with  the  minutest  care  the  co- 
operative movement  and  self-help,  the  trade-union  move- 
ment with  its  purely  economic  aims  and  methods,  the 
Chartist  movement  with  its  political  action,  and  the 
Owenite  movement,  both  in  its  purely  Utopian  phases  and 
in  its  later  development  into  syndicalist  socialism.  This 
long  and  profound  study  placed  Marx  and  Engels  in  a 
position  infinitely  beyond  that  of  their  contemporaries. 
Possessed  as  they  were  of  unusual  mental  powers,  it 
was  inevitable  that  such  a  training  should  have  placed 
them  in  a  position  of  intellectual  leadership  in  the  then 
rapidly  forming  working-class  organizations  of  Europe. 
The  study  of  English  capitalism  convinced  Marx  of 
the  truthfulness  of  certain  generalizations  which  he  had 
already  begun  to  formulate  in  1844.  It  became  more 
and  more  evident  to  him  that  economic  facts,  to  which 
history  had  hitherto  attributed  no  role  or  a  very  inferior 
one,  constituted,  at  least  in   the  modern  world,  a  de- 


136      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

cisive  historic  force.  "They  form  the  source  from  which 
spring  the  present  class  antagonisms.  These  antago- 
nisms in  countries  where  great  industry  has  carried  them 
to  their  complete  development,  particularly  in  England, 
are  the  bases  on  which  parties  are  founded,  are  the 
sources  of  political  struggles,  are  the  reasons  for  all 
political  history."  (3)  Although  Marx  had  arrived  at 
this  opinion  earlier  and  had  generalized  this  point  of  view 
in  "French-German  Annals,"  his  study  of  English  eco- 
nomics swept  away  any  possible  doubt  that  "in  general 
it  was  not  the  State  which  conditions  and  regulates  civil 
society,  but  civil  society  which  conditions  and  regulates 
the  State,  that  it  was  then  necessary  to  explain  politics 
and  history  by  economic  relations,  and  not  to  proceed 
inversely."  (4)  "This  discovery  which  revolutionized 
historical  science  was  essentially  the  work  of  Marx," 
says  Engels,  and,  with  his  customary  modesty,  he  adds: 
"The  part  which  can  be  attributed  to  me  is  very  small. 
It  concerned  itself  directly  with  the  working-class  move- 
ment of  the  period.  Communism  in  France  and  Ger- 
many and  Chartism  in  England  appeared  to  be  some- 
thing more  than  mere  chance  which  could  just  as  well 
not  have  existed.  These  movements  became  now  a  move- 
ment of  the  oppressed  class  of  modern  times,  the  work- 
ing class.  Henceforth  they  were  more  or  less  developed 
forms  of  the  historically  necessary  struggle  which  this 
class  must  carry  on  against  the  ruling  class,  the  bour- 
geoisie. They  were  forms  of  the  struggle  of  the  classes, 
but  which  were  distinguished  from  all  preceding  strug- 
gles by  this  fact :  the  class  now  oppressed,  the  proletariat, 
cannot  effect  its  emancipation  without  delivering  all  so- 
ciety from  its  division  into  classes,  without  freeing  it 
from  class  struggles.  No  longer  did  Communism  con- 
sist in  the  creation  of  a  social  ideal  as  perfect  as  possible; 


THE  BIRTH  OF  MODERN  SOCIALISM  137 

it  resolved  itself  into  a  clear  view  of  the  nature,  the  con- 
ditions, and  the  general  ends  of  the  struggle  carried  on 
by  the  working  class."  (5) 

It  was  not  the  intention  of  Marx  and  Engels  to  com- 
municate their  new  scientific  results  to  the  intellectual 
world  exclusively  by  means  of  large  volumes.  On  the 
contrary,  they  plunged  into  the  political  movement.  Be- 
sides having  intercourse  with  well-known  people,  par- 
ticularly in  the  western  part  of  Germany,  they  were  also 
in  contact  with  the  organized  working  classes.  "Our 
duty  was  to  found  our  conception  scientifically,  but  it  was 
just  as  important  that  we  should  win  over  the  European, 
and  especially  the  German,  working  classes  to  our  con- 
victions. When  it  was  all  clear  in  our  eyes,  we  set  to 
work."  (6)  A  new  German  working-class  society  was 
founded  in  Brussels,  and  the  support  was  enlisted  of  the 
Deutsche  Briisseler  Zeitimg,  which  served  as  an  organ 
until  the  revolution  of  February.  They  were  in  touch 
with  the  revolutionary  faction  of  the  English  Chartists 
under  the  leadership  of  George  Julian  Harney,  editor  of 
The  Northern  Star,  to  which  Engels  contributed.  They 
also  had  intercourse  with  the  democrats  of  Brussels  and 
with  the  French  social  democrats  of  la  Re  forme,  to 
which  Engels  contributed  news  of  the  English  and  Ger- 
man movements.  In  short,  the  relations  that  Marx  and 
Engels  had  established  with  the  radical  and  working- 
class  organizations  fully  served  the  great  purposes  they 
had  in  mind. 

It  was  in  the  Communist  League  that  Marx  and  En- 
gels saw  their  first  opportunity  to  impress  their  ideas  on 
the  labor  movement.  At  the  urgent  request  of  Joseph 
Moll,  a  watchmaker  and  a  prominent  member  of  the 
League,  Marx  consented,  in  1847,  to  present  to  that  or- 
ganization his  views,  and  the  result  was  the  famous  Com- 


138      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

munist  Manifesto.  Every  essential  idea  of  modern  so- 
cialism is  contained  in  that  brief  declaration.  Unfor- 
tunately, however,  outside  of  Germany,  the  Communist 
League  was  an  exotic  organization  that  could  make  little 
use  of  such  a  program.  Its  members  were  mostly  ex- 
iles, who,  by  the  very  nature  of  their  position,  were  hope- 
lessly out  of  things.  Little  groups,  surrounded  by  a  for- 
eign people,  exiles  are  rarely  able  to  affect  the  move- 
ment at  home  or  influence  the  national  movement  amid 
which  they  are  thrust.  There  is  little,  therefore,  note- 
worthy about  the  Communist  League.  It  had,  to  be  sure, 
gathered  together  a  few  able  and  energetic  spirits,  and 
some  of  these  in  later  years  exercised  considerable  influ- 
ence in  the  International.  But,  as  a  rule,  the  groups  of 
the  Communist  League  were  little  more  than  debating 
societies  whose  members  were  filled  with  sentimental, 
visionary,  and  insurrectionary  ideas.  Marx  himself 
finally  lost  all  patience  with  them,  because  he  could  not 
drive  out  of  their  heads  the  idea  that  they  could  revolu- 
tionize the  entire  world  by  some  sudden  dash  and 
through  the  exercise  of  will  power,  personal  sacrifice,  and 
heroic  action.  The  Communist  League,  therefore,  is 
memorable  only  because  it  gave  Marx  and  Engels  an 
opportunity  for  issuing  their  epoch-making  Manifesto, 
that  even  to-day  is  read  and  reread  by  the  workers  in  all 
lands  of  the  world.  Translated  into  every  language,  it  is 
the  one  pamphlet  that  can  be  found  in  every  country  as 
a  part  of  the  basic  literature  of  socalism. 

There  are  certain  principles  laid  down  in  the  Com- 
munist Manifesto  which  time  cannot  affect,  although  the 
greater  part  of  the  document  is  now  of  historic  value 
only.  The  third  section,  for  instance,  is  a  critique  of  the 
various  types  of  socialism  then  existing  in  Europe,  and 
this  part  can  hardly  be  understood  to-day  by  those  un- 


THE  BIRTH  OF  MODERN  SOCIALISM  139 

acquainted  with  those  sectarian  movements.  It  deals 
with  Reactionary  Socialism,  Feudal  Socialism,  Clerical 
Socialism,  Petty  Bourgeois  Socialism,  German  Social- 
ism, Conservative  or  Bourgeois  Socialism,  Critical-Uto- 
pian Socialism,  and  Communism.  The  mere  enumeration 
of  these  types  of  socialist  doctrine  indicates  what  a  chaos 
of  doctrine  and  theory  then  existed,  and  it  was  in  order 
to  distinguish  themselves  from  these  various  schools 
that  Marx  and  Engels  took  the  name  of  communists. 
Beginning  with  the  statement,  "The  history  of  all  hither- 
to existing  society  is  the  history  of  class  struggles,"  (7) 
the  Manifesto  treats  at  length  the  modern  struggle  be- 
tween the  working  class  and  the  capitalist  class. 
After  tracing  the  rise  of  capitalism,  the  develop- 
ment of  a  new  working  class,  and  the  consequences 
to  the  people  of  the  new  economic  order,  Marx  and  En- 
gels  outline  the  program  of  the  communists  and  their  re- 
lation to  the  then  existing  working-class  organizations 
and  political  parties.  They  deny  any  intention  of  form- 
ing a  new  sect,  declaring  that  they  throw  themselves 
whole-heartedly  into  the  working-class  movement  of  all 
countries,  with  the  one  aim  of  encouraging  and  develop- 
ing within  those  groups  a  political  organization  for  the 
conquest  of  political  power.  They  outline  certain  meas- 
ures which,  in  their  opinion,  should  stand  foremost  in 
the  program  of  labor,  all  of  them  having  to  do  with  some 
modification  of  the  institution  of  property. 

In  order  to  achieve  these  reforms,  and  eventually  "To 
wrest,  by  degrees,  all  capital  from  the  bourgeoisie,  to 
centralize  all  instruments  of  production  in  the  hands  of 
the  State,"  (8)  they  urge  the  formation  of  labor  par- 
ties as  soon  as  proper  preparations  have  been  made  and 
the  time  is  ripe  for  effective  class  action.  All  through 
the  Manifesto  runs  the  motif  that  every  class  struggle  is 


I4o      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

a  political  struggle.  Again  and  again  Marx  and  Engels 
return  to  that  thought  in  their  masterly  survey  of  the 
historical  conflicts  between  the  classes.  They  show  how 
the  bourgeoisie,  beginning  as  "an  oppressed  class  under 
the  sway  of  the  feudal  nobility,"  gradually  .  .  . 
"conquered  for  itself,  in  the  modern  representative  State, 
exclusive  political  sway,"  until  to-day  "the  executive  of 
the  modern  State  is  but  a  committee  for  managing  the 
common  affairs  of  the  whole  bourgeoisie."  (9)  Tracing 
the  rise  of  the  modern  working  class,  they  tell  of  its 
purely  retaliative  efforts  against  the  capitalists ;  how  at 
first  "they  smash  to  pieces  machinery,  they  set  factories 
ablaze";  how  they  fight  in  "incoherent"  masses,  "broken 
up  by  their  mutual  competition";  (10)  even  their  unions 
are  not  so  much  a  result  of  their  conscious  effort  as  they 
are  the  consequence  of  oppression.  Furthermore,  the 
workers  "do  not  fight  their  enemies,  but  the  enemies  of 
their  enemies."  (11)  "Now  and  then  the  workers  are 
victorious,  but  only  for  a  time.  The  real  fruit  of  their 
battles  lies  not  in  the  immediate  result,  but  in  the  ever- 
expanding  union  of  the  workers."  (12)  It  is  when  their 
unions  grow  national  in  character  and  the  struggle  de- 
velops into  a  national  struggle  between  the  classes  that 
it  naturally  takes  on  a  political  character.  Then  begins 
the  struggle  for  conquering  political  power.  But,  while 
"all  previous  historical  movements  were  movements  of 
minorities,  or  in  the  interests  of  minorities,  the  prole- 
tarian movement  is  the  self-conscious,  independent  move- 
ment of  the  immense  majority,  in  the  interest  of  the  im- 
mense majority."  (13)  Returning  again  to  the  underly- 
ing thought,  it  is  pointed  out  that  the  working  class  must 
"win  the  battle  of  democracy."  (14)  It  must  acquire 
"political  supremacy."  It  must  raise  itself  to  "the  posi- 
tion of  ruling  class,"  in  order  that  it  may  sweep  away 


THE  BIRTH  OF  MODERN  SOCIALISM  141 

"the  conditions  for  the  existence  of  class  antagonisms, 
and  of  classes  generally."  (15) 

Such  were  the  doctrines  and  tactics  proclaimed  by 
Marx  and  Engels  in  1847.  Tne  Manifesto  is  said  to  have 
been  received  with  great  enthusiasm  by  the  League,  but, 
whatever  happened  at  the  moment,  it  is  clear  that  the 
members  never  understood  the  doctrines  manifested.  In 
any  case,  various  factions  in  the  movement  were  still 
clamoring  for  insurrection  and  planning  their  conspira- 
cies, wholly  faithful  to  the  revolution-making  artifices 
of  the  period.  Two  of  the  most  prominent,  Willich  and 
Schapper,  were  carried  away  with  revolutionary  passion, 
and  "the  majority  of  the  London  workers,"  Engels  says, 
"refugees  for  the  most  part,  followed  them  into  the  camp 
of  the  bourgeois  democrats,  the  revolution-makers."  (16) 
They  declined  to  listen  to  protests.  "They  wanted  to  go 
the  other  way  and  to  make  revolutions,"  continues  En- 
gels. "We  refused  absolutely  to  do  this  and  the  schism 
followed."  (17) 

On  the  15th  of  September,  1850,  Marx  decided  to  re- 
sign from  the  central  council  of  the  organization,  and, 
feeling  that  such  an  act  required  some  justification,  he 
prepared  the  following  written  declaration :  "The  minor- 
ity *  [i.  e.,  his  opponents]  have  substituted  the  dogmatic 
spirit  for  the  critical,  the  idealistic  interpretation  of 
events  for  the  materialistic.  Simple  will  power,  instead 
of  the  true  relations  of  things,  has  become  the  motive 
force  of  revolution.  While  we  say  to  the  working  peo- 
ple :  'You  will  have  to  go  through  fifteen,  twenty,  fifty 
years  of  civil  wars  and  wars  between  nations  not  only  to 
change  existing  conditions,  but  to  change  yourselves  and 

*In  the  authority  cited  below  this  appears  as  "the  minority," 
but  I  notice  that  in  Jaures'  "Studies  in  Socialism,"  p.  44,  it 
appears  as  "the  majority." 


I42      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

make  yourselves  worthy  of  political  power,'  you,  on  the 
contrary,  say,  'We  ought  to  get  power  at  once,  or  else 
give  up  the  fight.'  While  we  draw  the  attention  of  the 
German  workman  to  the  undeveloped  state  of  the  prole- 
tariat in  Germany,  you  flatter  the  national  spirit  and  the 
guild  prejudices  of  the  German  artisans  in  the  grossest 
manner,  a  method  of  procedure  without  doubt  the  more 
popular  of  the  two.  Just  as  the  democrats  made  a  sort  of 
fetish  of  the  words  'the  people/  so  you  make  one  of  the 
word  'proletariat.'  Like  them,  you  substitute  revolu- 
tionary phrases  for  revolutionary  evolution."  (18)  This 
statement  of  Marx  is  one  of  the  most  significant  docu- 
ments of  the  period  and  certainly  one  of  the  most  illumi- 
nating we  possess  of  Marx's  determination  to  disavow 
the  insurrectionary  ideas  then  so  prevalent  throughout 
Europe.  Although  he  had  said  the  same  thing  before  in 
other  words,  there  could  be  no  longer  any  doubt  that  he 
cherished  no  dreams  of  a  great  revolutionary  cataclysm, 
nor  fondled  the  then  prevalent  theory  that  revolutions 
could  be  organized,  planned,  and  executed  by  will  power 
alone. 

It  is  clear,  therefore,  that  Marx  saw,  as  early  as  1850, 
little  revolutionary  promise  in  sectarian  organizations, 
secret  societies,  and  political  conspiracies.  The  day  was 
past  for  insurrections,  and  a  real  revolution  could  only 
arrive  as  a  result  of  economic  forces  and  class  antago- 
nisms. And  it  is  quite  obvious  that  he  was  becoming  more 
and  more  irritated  by  the  sentimentalism  and  dress-pa- 
rade revolutionism  of  the  socialist  sects.  He  looked  upon 
their  projects  as  childish  and  theatrical,  that  gave  as  little 
promise  of  changing  the  world's  history  as  battles  be- 
tween tin  soldiers  on  some  nursery  floor.  He  seemed  no 
longer  concerned  with  ideals,  abstract  rights,  or  "eternal 
verities."     Those  who  misunderstood  him  or  were  little 


THE  BIRTH  OF  MODERN  SOCIALISM  143 

associated  with  him  were  horrified  at  what  they  thought 
was  his  cynical  indifference  to  such  glorious  visions  as 
liberty,  fraternity,  and  equality.  Like  Darwin,  Marx 
was  always  an  earnest  seeker  of  facts  and  forces.  He 
was  laying  the  foundations  of  a  scientific  socialism  and 
dissecting  the  anatomy  of  capitalism  in  pursuit  of  the 
laws  of  social  evolution.  The  gigantic  intellectual  la- 
bors of  Marx  from  1850  to  1870  are  to-day  receiving 
due  attention,  and,  while  one  after  another  of  the  later 
economists  has  been  forced  reluctantly  to  acknowledge 
his  genius,  few  now  will  take  issue  with  Professor  Al- 
bion W.  Small  when  he  says,  "I  confidently  predict  that 
in  the  ultimate  judgment  of  history  Marx  will  have  a 
place  in  social  science  analogous  with  that  of  Gali- 
leo in  physical  science."  (19)  In  exile,  and  often  des- 
perate poverty,  Marx  worked  out  with  infinite  care  the 
scientific  basis  of  the  generalization — first  given  to  the 
world  in  the  Communist  Manifesto — that  social  and  po- 
litical institutions  are  the  product  of  economic  forces. 
In  all  periods  there  have  been  antagonistic  economic 
classes  whose  relative  power  is  determined  by  struggles 
between  them.  "Freedman  and  slave,"  he  says,  "patrician 
and  plebeian,  lord  and  serf,  guild  master  and  journey- 
man, in  a  word,  oppressor  and  oppressed,  stood  in  con- 
stant opposition  to  one  another,  carried  on  an  uninter- 
rupted, now  hidden,  now  open  fight,  a  fight  that  each 
time  ended  either  in  a  revolutionary  reconstruction  of 
society  at  large,  or  in  the  common  ruin  of  the  contending 
classes."  (20)  Here  is  a  summary  of  that  conflict  which 
Professor  Small  declares  "is  to  the  social  process  what 
friction  is  to  mechanics."  (21)  It  may  well  be  that  "the 
fact  of  class  struggle  is  as  axiomatic  to-day  as  the  fact 
of  gravitation,"  (22)  yet,  when  Marx  first  elaborated  his 
theory,  it  was  not  only  a  revolutionary  doctrine  among 


144      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

the  socialist  sects,  but  like  Darwin's  theory  of  evolution 
it  was  assailed  from  every  angle  by  every  school  of  econ- 
omists. The  important  practical  question  that  arises  out 
of  this  scientific  work,  and  which  particularly  concerns 
us  here,  is  that  this  theory  of  the  class  struggle  forever 
destroyed  the  old  ideas  of  revolution,  scrap-heaped  con- 
spiracies and  insurrections,  and  laid  the  theoretical 
foundations  for  the  modern  working-class  movement. 

Actually,  it  was  Utopian  socialism  that  was  destroyed 
by  this  new  theory.  It  expressed  itself  in  at  least  three 
diverse  ways.  There  were  groups  of  conspirators  and 
revolutionists  who  believed  that  the  world  was  on  the 
eve  of  a  great  upheaval  and  that  the  people  should  pre- 
pare for  the  moment  when  suddenly  they  could  seize  the 
governments  of  Europe,  destroy  ancient  institutions,  and 
establish  a  new  social  order.  Another  form  of  utopian- 
ism  was  the  effort  to  persuade  the  capitalists  themselves 
to  abolish  dividends,  profits,  rent,  and  interest,  to  turn 
the  factories  over  to  the  workers,  to  become  themselves 
toilers,  and  to  share  equally,  one  with  another,  the 
products  of  their  joint  labor.  Still  another  form  of 
Utopian  socialism  was  that  of  Owen,  Fourier,  and  Cabet, 
who  contemplated  the  establishment  of  ideal  communi- 
ties in  which  a  new  world  should  be  built,  where  all 
should  be  free  and  equal,  and  where  fraternity  would  be 
based  upon  a  perfect  economic  communism.  Some  really 
noble  spirits  in  France,  England,  and  America  had  de- 
voted time,  love,  energy,  and  wealth  to  this  propaganda 
and  in  actual  attempts  to  establish  these  Utopias.  But 
after  '48  the  upper  classes  were  despaired  of.  Their 
brutal  reprisals,  their  suppression  of  every  working-class 
movement,  their  ferocious  repression  of  the  unions,  of 
the  press,  and  of  the  right  of  assembly — all  these  ma- 
terially aided  Marx's  theory  in  disillusioning  many  of  the 


THE  BIRTH  OF  MODERN  SOCIALISM  145 

philanthropic  and  tender-hearted  Utopians.  And  from 
then  on  the  hope  of  every  sincere  advocate  of  funda- 
mental social  changes  rested  on  the  working  class — on  its 
organizations,  its  press,  and  its  labors — for  the  estab- 
lishment of  the  new  order. 

The  most  striking  characteristic  of  the  period  which 
follows  was  the  attempt  of  all  the  socialist  and  anarchist 
sects  to  inject  their  ideas  into  the  rising  labor  movement. 
With  the  single  exception  of  Robert  Owen  in  England, 
the  earlier  socialists  had  ignored  the  working  classes. 
All  their  appeals  were  made  to  well-to-do  men,  and  some 
of  them  even  hoped  that  the  monarchs  of  Europe  might 
be  induced  to  take  the  initiative.  But  Marx  and  Engels 
made  their  appeal  chiefly  to  the  working  class.  The  pro- 
found reaction  which  settled  over  Europe  in  the  years 
following  '48  ended  all  other  dreams,  and  from  this  time 
on  every  proposal  for  a  radical  change  in  the  organization 
of  society  was  presented  to  the  workers  as  the  only  class 
that  was  really  seeking,  by  reason  of  its  economic  subjec- 
tion, basic  alterations  in  the  institutions  of  property  and 
the  constitution  of  the  State.  The  working  classes  of 
Germany,  France,  England,  and  other  countries  had  al- 
ready begun  to  form  groups  for  the  purpose  of  discuss- 
ing political  questions,  and  the  ideas  of  Marx  began  to 
be  propagated  in  all  the  centers  of  working-class  activity. 

The  blending  of  labor  and  socialism  in  most  of  the 
countries  of  Europe  was  not,  however,  a  work  of  months, 
but  of  decades.  The  first  great  effort  to  accomplish 
that  task  occurred  in  1864,  when  the  International  Work- 
ing Men's  Association  was  launched  in  St.  Martin's  Hall 
in  London.  During  the  years  from  '47  to  '64,  Marx  and 
Engels,  with  their  little  coterie  in  London  and  their  cor- 
respondents in  other  countries,  spent  most  of  their  time 
in  study,  reading,  and  writing,  with  little  opportunity  to 


146      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

participate  in  the  actual  struggles  of  labor.  Marx  was  at 
work  on  "Capital"  and  schooling,  in  his  leisure  hours,  a 
few  of  the  notable  men  who  were  later  to  become  lead- 
ers of  the  working  class  in  Europe.  It  was  a  dull  period, 
wearisome  and  vexatious  enough  to  men  who  were  boldly 
prophesying  that  industrial  conditions  would  create  a 
world-wide  solidarity  of  labor.  The  first  glimmer  of 
hope  came  with  the  London  International  Exhibition  of 
1862,  which  brought  together  by  chance  groups  of  work- 
ingmen  from  various  countries.  The  visit  to  London 
enabled  them  to  observe  the  British  trade  unions,  and 
they  left  deeply  impressed  by  their  strength.  Further- 
more, the  Exhibition  brought  the  English  workers  and 
those  of  other  nationalities  into  touch  with  each  other. 
How  much  this  meant  was  shown  in  1863.  When  the 
Polish  uprising  was  being  suppressed,  the  English  work- 
ers sent  to  their  French  comrades  a  protest,  in  answer 
to  which  the  Paris  workmen  sent  a  delegation  to  London. 
This  gathering  in  sympathy  with  Poland  laid  the  foun- 
dations for  the  International.  Nearly  every  important 
revolutionary  sect  in  Europe  was  represented :  the  Ger- 
man communists,  the  French  Blanquists  and  Proudhon- 
ians,  and  the  Italian  Mazzinians ;  but  the  only  delegates 
who  represented  powerful  working-class  organizations 
were  the  English  trade  unionists.  The  other  organiza- 
tions, even  as  late  as  this,  were  still  little  more  than  co- 
teries, of  hero-worshiping  tendencies,  fast  developing 
into  sectarian  organizations  that  seemed  destined  to  di- 
vide hopelessly  and  forever  the  labor  movement. 

It  was  perhaps  inevitable  that  the  more  closely  the 
sects  were  brought  together,  the  more  clearly  they  should 
perceive  their  differences,  although  Marx  had  exercised 
every  care  to  draft  a  policy  that  would  allay  strife.  Maz- 
zini  and  his  followers  could  not  long  endure  the  policies 


THE  BIRTH  OE  MODERN  SOCIALISM  147 

of  the  International,  and  they  soon  withdrew.  The 
Proudhonians  never  at  any  time  sympathized  with  the 
program  and  methods  adopted  by  the  International. 
The  German  organizations  were  not  able  to  affiliate,  by 
reason  of  the  political  conditions  in  that  country,  al- 
though numerous  individuals  attended  the  congresses. 
Nearly  all  the  Germans  were  supporters  of  the  policies 
of  Marx,  while  most  of  the  leading  trade  unionists  of 
England  completely  understood  and  sympathized  with 
Marx's  aim  of  uniting  the  various  working-class  organi- 
zations of  Europe  into  an  international  association.  They 
all  felt  that  such  a  movement  was  an  historic  and  eco- 
nomic necessity  and  that  the  time  for  it  had  arrived.  They 
intended  to  set  about  that  work  and  to  knit  together  the 
innumerable  little  organizations  then  forming  in  all  coun- 
tries. They  sought  to  institute  a  meeting  ground  where 
the  social  and  political  program  of  the  workers  could  be 
formulated,  where  their  views  could  be  clarified,  and  their 
purposes  defined.  It  was  not  to  be  a  secret  organization, 
but  entirely  open  and  above  board.  It  was  not  for  con- 
spiratory  action,  but  for  the  building  up  of  a  great  move- 
ment. It  was  not  intended  to  encourage  insurrection  or 
to  force  ahead  of  time  a  revolution.  In  the  opinion  of 
Marx,  as  we  know,  a  social  revolution  was  thought  to  be 
inevitable,  and  the  International  was  to  bide  its  time,  pre- 
paring for  the  day  of  its  coming,  in  order  to  make  that 
revolution  as  peaceable  and  as  effective  as  possible. 

The  Preamble  of  the  Provisional  Rules  of  the  Inter- 
national— entirely  the  work  of  Marx — expresses  with 
sufficient  clearness  the  position  of  the  International.  It 
was  there  declared  :  "That  the  emancipation  of  the  work- 
ing classes  must  be  conquered  by  the  working  classes 
themselves ;  that  the  struggle  for  the  emancipation  of  the 
working  classes  means  not  a  struggle  for  class  privileges 


148      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

and  monopolies,  but  for  equal  rights  and  duties,  and  the 
abolition  of  all  class  rule; 

"That  the  economic  subjection  of  the  man  of  labor 
to  the  monopolizer  of  the  means  of  labor,  that  is,  the 
sources  of  life,  lies  at  the  bottom  of  servitude  in  all  its 
forms,  of  all  social  misery,  mental  degradation,  and  po- 
litical dependence ; 

"That  the  economic  emancipation  of  the  working 
classes  is  therefore  the  great  end  to  which  every  political 
movement  ought  to  be  subordinate  as  a  means ; 

"That  all  efforts  aiming  at  that  great  end  have  hitherto 
failed  from  the  want  of  solidarity  between  the  manifold 
divisions  of  labor  in  each  country,  and  from  the  absence 
of  a  fraternal  bond  of  union  between  the  working  classes 
of  different  countries ; 

"That  the  emancipation  of  labor  is  neither  a  local  nor 
a  national,  but  a  social  problem,  embracing  all  countries 
in  which  modern  society  exists,  and  depending  for  its 
solution  on  the  concurrence,  practical  and  theoretical, 
of  the  most  advanced  countries ; 

"That  the  present  revival  of  the  working  classes  in  the 
most  industrial  countries  of  Europe,  while  it  raises  a  new 
hope,  gives  solemn  warning  against  a  relapse  into  the 
old  errors  and  calls  for  the  immediate  combination  of  the 
still  disconnected  movements."  (23) 

In  this  brief  declaration  we  find  the  essence  of  Marx- 
ian socialism:  that  the  working  classes  must  them- 
selves work  out  their  own  salvation ;  that  their  servitude 
is  economic ;  and  that  all  workers  must  join  together  in 
a  political  movement,  national  and  international,  in  order 
to  achieve  their  emancipation.  Unfortunately,  the 
Proudhonian  anarchists  were  never  able  to  comprehend 
the  position  of  Marx,  and  in  the  first  congress  at  Geneva, 
in  1866,  the  quarrels  between  the  various  elements  gave 


THE  BIRTH  OF  MODERN  SOCIALISM  149 

Marx  no  little  concern.  He  did  not  attend  that  con- 
gress, and  he  afterward  wrote  to  his  young  friend,  Dr. 
Kugelmann :  "I  was  unable  to  go,  and  I  did  not  wish 
to  do  so,  but  it  was  I  who  wrote  the  program  of  the 
London  delegates.  I  limited  it  on  purpose  to  points 
which  admit  of  an  immediate  understanding  and  common 
action  by  the  workingmen,  and  which  give  immediately 
strength  and  impetus  to  the  needs  of  the  class  struggle 
and  to  the  organization  of  the  workers  as  a  class.  The 
Parisian  gentlemen  had  their  heads  filled  with  the  most 
empty  Proudhonian  phraseology.  They  chatter  of  sci- 
ence, and  know  nothing  of  it.  They  scorn  all  revolution- 
ary action,  that  is  to  say,  proceeding  from  the  class 
struggle  itself,  every  social  movement  that  is  centralized 
and  consequently  obtainable  by  legislation  through  politi- 
cal means  (as,  for  example,  the  legal  shortening  of  the 
working  day)."  (24)  These  words  indicate  that  Marx 
considered  the  chief  work  of  the  International  to  be  the 
building  up  of  a  working-class  political  movement  to  ob- 
tain laws  favorable  to  labor.  Furthermore,  he  was  of 
the  opinion  that  such  work  was  of  a  revolutionary  na- 
ture. 

The  clearest  statement,  perhaps,  of  Marx's  idea  of  the 
revolutionary  character  of  political  activity  is  to  be 
found  in  the  address  which  he  prepared  at  the  request 
of  the  public  meeting  that  launched  the  International. 
He  traces  there  briefly  the  conditions  of  the  working 
class  in  England.  After  depicting  the  misery  of  the 
masses,  he  hastily  reviews  the  growth  of  the  labor  move- 
ment that  ended  with  the  Chartist  agitation.  Although 
from  1848  to  1864  was  a  period  when  the  English  work- 
ing class  seemed,  he  says,  "thoroughly  reconciled  to  a 
state  of  political  nullity,"  (25)  nevertheless  two  encour- 
aging developments  had  taken  place.     One  was  the  vie- 


150      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

lory  won  by  the  working  classes  in  carrying  the  Ten 
Hours  Bill.  It  was  "not  only  a  great  practical  success; 
it  was  the  victory  of  a  principle ;  it  was  the  first  time  that 
in  broad  daylight  the  political  economy  of  the  middle 
class  succumbed  to  the  political  economy  of  the  working 
class."  (26)  The  other  victory  was  the  growth  of  the 
cooperative  movement.  "The  value  of  these  great  social 
experiments  cannot  be  overrated,"  he  says.  "By  deed, 
instead  of  by  argument,  they  have  shown  that  production 
on  a  large  scale,  and  in  accord  with  the  behests  of  mod- 
ern science,  may  be  carried  on  without  the  existence  of 
a  class  of  masters  employing  a  class  of  hands."  (27) 
Arguing  that  cooperative  labor  should  be  developed  to 
national  dimensions  and  be  fostered  by  State  funds,  he 
urges  working-class  political  action  as  the  means  to 
achieve  this  end.  "To  conquer  political  power  has  there- 
fore become  the  great  duty  of  the  working  classes."  (28) 
This  is  the  conclusion  of  Marx  concerning  revolutionary 
methods;  and  it  is  clear  that  his  conception  of  "revolu- 
tionary action"  differed  not  only  from  that  of  the  Prou- 
dhonians  and  Mazzinians,  but  also  from  that  of  "the 
bourgeois  democrats,  the  revolution-makers,"  (29)  who 
"extemporized  revolutions."  (30) 

At  the  end  of  Marx's  letter  to  Kugelmann,  he  tells  of 
the  beginning  already  made  by  the  International  in  Lon- 
don in  actual  political  work.  "The  movement  for  elec- 
toral reform  here,"  he  writes,  "which  our  General  Coun- 
cil (quorum  magna  pars)  created  and  launched,  has  as- 
sumed dimensions  that  have  kept  on  growing  until  now 
they  are  irresistible."  (31)  The  General  Council  threw 
itself  unreservedly  into  this  agitation.  An  electoral  re- 
form conference  was  held  in  February,  1867,  attended 
by  two  hundred  delegates  from  all  parts  of  England, 
Scotland,  and  Ireland.      Later,  gigantic  mass  meetings 


THE  BIRTH  OF  MODERN  SOCIALISM  151 

were  held  throughout  the  country  to  bring  pressure  upon 
the  Government.  Frederic  Harrison  and  Professor  E. 
S.  Beesly,  well  known  for  their  sympathy  with  labor, 
were  appealing  to  the  working  classes  to  throw  their 
energies  into  the  fight.  "Nothing  will  compel  the  ruling 
classes,''  wrote  Harrison  in  1867,  "to  recognize  the 
rights  of  the  working  classes  and  to  pay  attention  to 
their  just  demands  until  the  workers  have  obtained  po- 
litical power."  (32)  Professor  Beesly,  the  intimate 
friend  of  Marx,  was  urging  the  unions  to  enter  politics 
as  an  independent  force,  on  the  ground  that  the  difference 
between  the  Tories  and  the  Liberals  was  only  the  differ- 
ence between  the  upper  and  nether  millstones.  In  all  this 
agitation  Marx  saw,  of  course,  the  working  out  of  his 
own  ideas  for  the  upbuilding  of  a  great  independent 
political  organization  of  the  working  class.  All  the  ener- 
gies of  the  General  Council  of  the  International  were, 
therefore,  devoted  to  the  political  struggle  of  the  British 
workers.  However,  in  all  this  campaign,  emphasis  was 
placed  upon  the  central  idea  of  the  association — that 
political  power  was  wanted,  in  order,  peaceably  and 
legally,  to  remedy  economic  wrongs.  The  wretched  con- 
dition of  the  workers  in  the  industrial  towns  and  the 
even  greater  misery  of  the  Irish  peasants  and  English 
farm  laborers  were  the  bases  of  all  agitation.  While 
occupied  at  this  time  chiefly  with  the  economic  and  po- 
litical struggles  in  Britain,  the  General  Council  was  also 
keeping  a  sharp  eye  on  similar  conditions  in  Europe  and 
America.  When  Lincoln  was  chosen  President  for  the 
second  time,  a  warm  address  of  congratulation  was  sent 
to  the  American  people,  expressing  joy  that  the  sworn 
enemy  of  slavery  had  been  again  chosen  to  represent 
them.  More  than  once  the  International  communicated 
with  Lincoln,  and  perhaps  no  words  more  perfectly  ex- 


1 52      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

press  the  ideal  of  the  labor  movement  than  those  that 
Lincoln  once  wrote  to  a  body  of  workingmen:  "The 
strongest  bond  of  human  sympathy,  outside  of  the  family 
relation,  should  be  one  uniting  all  working  people,  of  all 
nations,  and  tongues,  and  kindreds."  (33) 

To  unite  thus  the  workers  of  all  lands  and  to  organ- 
ize them  into  great  political  parties  were  the  chief  aims 
of  Marx  in  the  International.  And  in  1869  it  seemed 
that  this  might  actually  be  accomplished  in  a  few  years. 
In  France,  Belgium,  Switzerland,  Germany,  Austria, 
Italy,  and  other  countries  the  International  was  making 
rapid  headway.  Nearly  all  the  most  important  labor 
bodies  of  Europe  were  actually  affiliated,  or  at  least 
friendly,  to  the  new  movement.  At  all  the  meetings 
held  there  was  enthusiasm,  and  the  future  of  the  Inter- 
national seemed  very  promising  indeed.  It  was  recog- 
nized as  the  vehicle  for  expressing  the  views  of  labor 
throughout  Europe.  It  had  formulated  its  principles  and 
tactics,  and  had  already  made  a  creditable  beginning  in 
the  gigantic  task  before  it  of  systematically  carrying  on 
its  agitation,  education,  and  organization.  Marx's  ener- 
gies were  being  taxed  to  the  utmost.  Nearly  all  the  im- 
mense executive  work  of  the  International  fell  on  him, 
and  nearly  every  move  made  was  engineered  by  him. 
Yet  at  that  very  time  he  was  on  the  point  of  publishing 
the  first  volume  of  "Capital,"  the  result  of  gigantic  re- 
searches into  industrial  history  and  economic  theory. 
This  great  work  was  intended  to  be,  in  its  literal  sense, 
the  Bible  of  the  working  class,  as  indeed  it  has  since  be- 
come. Cerainly,  Jaures'  tribute  to  Marx  is  well  de- 
served and  fairly  sums  up  the  work  accomplished  by  him 
in  the  period  1847- 1869.  "To  Marx  belongs  the 
merit,"  he  says,  "...  of  having  drawn  together 
and  unified  the  labor  movement  and  the  socialist  idea. 


THE  BIRTH  OF  MODERN  SOCIALISM  153 

In  the  first  third  of  the  nineteenth  century  labor  strug- 
gled and  fought  against  the  crushing  power  of  capital ; 
but  it  was  not  conscious  itself  toward  what  end  it  was 
straining;  it  did  not  know  that  the  true  objective  of  its 
effort  was  the  common  ownership  of  property.  And,  on 
the  other  hand,  socialism  did  not  know  that  the  labor 
movement  was  the  living  form  in  which  its  spirit  was 
embodied,  the  concrete  practical  force  of  which  it  stood 
in  need.  Marx  was  the  most  clearly  convinced  and  the 
most  powerful  among  those  who  put  an  end  to  the  em- 
piricism of  the  labor  movement  and  the  utopianism  of  the 
socialist  thought,  and  this  should  always  be  remembered 
to  his  credit.  By  a  crowning  application  of  the  Hegelian 
method,  he  united  the  Idea  and  the  Fact,  thought  and 
history.  He  enriched  the  practical  movement  by  the 
idea,  and  to  the  theory  he  added  practice ;  he  brought  the 
socialist  thought  into  proletarian  life,  and  proletarian 
life  into  socialist  thought.  From  that  time  on  socialism 
and  the  proletariat  became  inseparable."  (34) 


CHAPTER   VIII 

THE  BATTLE  BETWEEN  MARX  AND  BAKOUNIN 

At  the  moment  when  the  future  of  the  International 
seemed  most  promising  and  the  political  ideas  of  Marx 
were  actually  taking  root  in  nearly  all  countries,  an  appli- 
cation was  received  by  the  General  Council  in  London 
to  admit  the  Alliance  of  Social  Democracy.  This,  we  will 
remember,  was  the  organization  that  Bakounin  had 
formed  in  1868  and  was  the  popular  section  of  that  re- 
markable secret  hierarchy  which  he  had  endeavored  to 
establish  in  1864.  The  General  Council  declined  to  ad- 
mit the  Alliance,  on  grounds  which  proved  later  to  be 
well  founded,  namely,  that  schisms  would  undoubtedly  be 
encouraged  if  the  International  should  permit  an  organi- 
zation with  an  entirely  different  program  and  policies  to 
join  it  in  a  body.  Nevertheless,  the  General  Council  de- 
clared that  the  members  of  the  Alliance  could  affiliate 
themselves  as  individuals  with  the  various  national  sec- 
tions. After  considerable  debate,  Bakounin  and  his  fol- 
lowers decided  to  abandon  the  Alliance  and  to  join  the 
International.  Whether  the  Alliance  was  in  fact  abol- 
ished is  still  open  to  question,  but  in  any  case  Bakounin 
appeared  in  the  International  toward  the  end  of  the  six- 
ties, to  challenge  all  the  theories  of  Marx  and  to  offer, 
in  their  stead,  his  own  philosophy  of  universal  revolu- 
tion. Anarchism  as  the  end  and  terrorism  as  the  means 
were  thus  injected  into  the  organization  at  its  most  form- 
ative period,  when  the  laboring  classes  of  all  Europe  had 

154 


BATTLE  BETWEEN  MARX  AND  BAKOUNIN     155 

just  begun  to  write  their  program,  evolve  their  princi- 
ples, and  define  their  tactics.  With  great  force  and  mag- 
netism, Bakounin  undertook  his  war  upon  the  General 
Council,  and  those  who  recall  the  period  will  realize  that 
nothing  could  have  more  nearly  expressed  the  occa- 
sional spirit  of  the  masses — the  very  spirit  that  Marx  and 
Engels  were  endeavoring  to  change — than  exactly  the 
methods  proposed  by  Bakounin. 

Whether  it  were  better  to  move  gradually  and  peace- 
fully along  what  seemed  a  never-ending  road  to  emanci- 
pation or  to  begin  the  revolution  at  once  by  insurrection 
and  civil  war — this  was  in  reality  the  question  which, 
from  that  moment  on,  agitated  the  International.  It  had 
always  troubled  more  or  less  the  earlier  organizations  of 
labor,  and  now,  aided  by  Bakounin's  eloquence  and  fiery 
revolutionism,  it  became  the  great  bone  of  contention 
throughout  Europe.  The  struggles  in  the  International 
between  those  who  became  known  later  as  the  anarchists 
and  the  socialists  remind  one  of  certain  Greek  stories, 
in  which  the  outstanding  figures  seem  to  impersonate 
mighty  forces,  and  it  is  not  impossible  that  one  day  they 
may  serve  as  material  for  a  social  epic.  We  all  know 
to-day  the  interminable  study  that  engages  the  the- 
ologians in  their  attempts  to  describe  the  battles  and 
schisms  in  the  early  Christian  Church.  And  there  can 
be  no  doubt  that,  if  socialism  fulfills  the  purpose  which 
its  advocates  have  in  mind,  these  early  struggles  in  its 
history  will  become  the  object  of  endless  research  and 
commentary.  The  calumnies,  the  feuds,  the  misunder- 
standings, the  clashing  of  doctrines,  the  antagonism  of 
the  ruling  spirits,  the  plots  and  conspiracies,  the  victories 
and  defeats — all  these  various  phases  of  this  war  to  the 
death  between  socialists  and  anarchists — will  in  that  case 
present  to  history  the  most  vital  struggle  of  this  age. 


156      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

But,  whatever  may  be  the  outcome  of  the  socialist  move- 
ment, it  is  hardly  too  much  to  say  that  to  both  an- 
archists and  socialists  these  struggles  seemed,  at  the 
time  they  were  taking  place,  of  supreme  importance  to 
the  destinies  of  humanity. 

The  contending  titans  of  this  war  were,  of  course, 
Karl  Marx  and  Michael  Bakounin.  It  is  hardly  neces- 
sary to  go  into  the  personal  feud  that  played  so  con- 
spicuous a  part  in  the  struggle  between  them.  Perhaps 
no  one  at  this  late  day  can  prove  what  Marx  and  his 
friends  themselves  were  unable  to  prove — although  they 
never  ceased  repeating  the  allegations — that  Bakounin 
was  a  spy  of  the  Russian  Government,  that  his  life  had 
been  thrice  spared  through  the  influence  of  that  Govern- 
ment, that  he  was  treacherous  and  dishonest,  and  that  his 
sole  purpose  was  to  disrupt  and  destroy  the  International 
Working  Men's  Association.  Nor  is  it  necessary  to  con- 
sider the  charges  made  against  Marx — some  of  them 
time  has  already  taken  care  of — that  he  was  domineering, 
malicious,  and  ambitious,  that  his  spirit  was  actuated  by 
intrigue,  and  that,  when  he  conceived  a  dislike  for  any- 
one, he  was  merciless  and  conscienceless  in  his  warfare 
on  that  one.  Incompatibility  of  temperament  and  of 
personality  played  its  part  in  the  battles  between  these 
two,  but,  even  had  there  been  no  mutual  dislike,  the  dif- 
ferences between  their  principles  and  tactics  would  have 
necessitated  a  battle  a  outrance. 

For  twenty  years  before  the  birth  of  the  International, 
Marx  and  Bakounin  had  crossed  and  recrossed  each 
other's  circle.  They  had  always  quarreled.  There  was  a 
mutual  fascination,  due  perhaps  to  an  innate  antagonism, 
that  brought  them  again  and  again  together  at  critical 
periods.  At  times  there  seemed  a  chance  of  reconcilia- 
tion, but  they  no  more  touched  each  other  than  imme- 


BATTLE  BETWEEN  MARX  AND  BAKOUNIN     157 

diately  there  flared  forth  the  old  animosity.  When  Ba- 
kounin  left  Russia  in  1843,  ne  met  Proudhon  and  Marx 
in  Paris.  At  that  period  the  doctrines  of  all  three  were 
germinating.  Bakounin  had  already  written,  "The  de- 
sire for  destruction  is  at  the  same  time  a  creative  de- 
sire." (1)  Proudhon  had  begun  to  formulate  the  princi- 
ples of  anarchism,  and  Marx  the  principles  of  socialism. 
"He  was  much  more  advanced  than  I  was,"  wrote  Ba- 
kounin of  Marx  at  this  period.  "I  knew  nothing 
then  of  political  economy,  I  was  not  yet  freed  from 
metaphysical  abstraction,  and  my  socialism  was  only  in- 
stinctive. ...  It  was  precisely  at  this  epoch  that 
he  elaborated  the  first  fundamentals  of  his  present  sys- 
tem. We  saw  each  other  rather  often,  for  I  respected 
him  deeply  for  his  science  and  for  his  passionate  and 
serious  devotion,  although  always  mingled  with  personal 
vanity,  to  the  cause  of  the  proletariat,  and  I  sought  with 
eagerness  his  conversation,  which  was  always  instructive 
and  witty — when  it  was  not  inspired  with  mean  hatred, 
which,  too  often,  alas,  was  the  case.  Never,  however, 
was  there  frank  intimacy  between  us.  Our  tempera- 
ments did  not  allow  that.  He  called  me  a  sentimental 
idealist,  and  he  was  right;  I  called  him  a  vain  man,  per- 
fidious and  artful,  and  I  was  right  also."  (2)  This  mu- 
tual dislike  and  even  distrust  subsisted  to  the  end. 

Certain  events  in  1848  widened  the  gulf  between  them. 
At  the  news  of  the  outbreak  of  the  revolution  in  Paris, 
hundreds  of  the  restless  spirits  hurried  there  to  take  a 
hand  in  the  situation.  And  after  the  proclamation  of  the 
Republic  they  began  to  consider  various  projects  of  car- 
rying the  revolution  into  their  own  countries.  Plans  were 
being  discussed  for  organizing  legions  to  invade  foreign 
countries,  and  a  number  of  the  German  communists  en- 
tered heartily  into  the  plan  of  Herwegh,  the  erratic  Ger- 


158      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

man  poet — "the  iron  lark" — who  led  a  band  of  revolu- 
tionists into  Baden.  "We  arose  vehemently  against  these 
attempts  to  play  at  revolution,"  says  Engels,  speaking 
for  himself  and  Marx.  "In  the  state  of  fermenta- 
tion which  then  existed  in  Germany,  to  carry  into  our 
country  an  invasion  which  was  destined  to  import  the 
revolution  by  force,  was  to  injure  the  revolution  in 
Germany,  to  consolidate  the  governments,  and  .  .  . 
to  deliver  the  legions  over  defenseless  to  the  German 
troops."  (3)  Wilhelm  Liebknecht,  then  twenty-two 
years  of  age,  who  was  in  favor  of  Herwegh's  project, 
wrote  afterward  of  Marx's  opposition.  Marx  "under- 
stood that  the  plan  of  organizing  'foreign  legions'  for 
the  purpose  of  carrying  the  revolution  into  other  coun- 
tries emanated  from  the  French  bourgeois-republicans, 
and  that  the  'movement'  had  been  artificially  inspired 
with  the  twofold  intention  of  getting  rid  of  troublesome 
elements  and  of  carrying  off  the  foreign  laborers  whose 
competition  made  itself  doubly  felt  during  this  grave 
business  crisis."  (4) 

Undeterred  by  Marx,  Herwegh  marshaled  his 
"legions"  and  entered  Baden,  to  be  utterly  crushed,  ex- 
actly as  Marx  had  foreseen.  A  quarrel  then  arose  be- 
tween Marx  and  Bakounin  over  Herwegh's  project.  Far 
from  changing  Marx's  mind,  however,  it  made  him  sus- 
pect Bakounin  as  perhaps  in  the  pay  of  the  reactionaries. 
In  any  case,  he  made  no  effort  to  prevent  the  Neue 
Rheinische  Zeitung  from  printing  shortly  after  the  fol- 
lowing: "Yesterday  it  was  asserted  that  George  Sand 
was  in  possession  of  papers  which  seriously  compro- 
mised the  Russian  who  has  been  banished  from  here, 
Michael  Bakounin,  and  represented  him  as  an  instru- 
ment or  an  agent  of  Russia,  newly  enrolled,  to  whom  is 
attributed  the  leading  part  in  the  recent  arrest  of  the 


BATTLE  BETWEEN  MARX  AND  BAKOUNIN     159 

unfortunate  Poles.  George  Sand  has  shown  these  pa- 
pers to  some  of  her  friends."  (5)  Marx  later  printed 
Bakounin's  answer  to  these  charges — which  were,  in  fact, 
groundless — and  in  his  letters  to  the  New  York  Tribune 
(1852)  even  commended  Bakounin  for  his  services  in  the 
Dresden  uprising  of  1849.  (6)  Nevertheless,  there  is 
no  doubt  that  to  the  end  Marx  believed  Bakounin  to  be 
a  tool  of  the  enemy.  These  quarrels  are  important  only 
as  they  are  prophetic  in  thus  early  disclosing  the  gulf 
between  Marx  and  Bakounin  in  their  conception  of  revo- 
lutionary activity.  Although  profoundly  revolutionary, 
Marx  was  also  rigidly  rational.  He  had  no  patience,  and 
not  an  iota  of  mercy,  for  those  who  lost  their  heads 
and  attempted  to  lead  the  workers  into  violent  out- 
breaks that  could  result  only  in  a  massacre.  On  this 
point  he  would  make  no  concessions,  and  anyone  who  at- 
tempted such  suicidal  madness  was  in  Marx's  mind 
either  an  imbecile  or  a  paid  agent  provocateur.  The  fail- 
ure of  Herwegh's  project  forced  Bakounin  to  admit  later 
that  Marx  had  been  right.  Yet,  as  we  know,  with  Ba- 
kounin's  advancing  years  the  passion  for  insurrections 
became  with  him  almost  a  mania. 

If  this  quarrel  between  Bakounin  and  Marx  casts  a 
light  upon  the  causes  of  their  antagonism,  a  still  greater 
illumination  is  shed  by  the  differences  between  them 
which  arose  in  1849.  Bakounin,  in  that  year,  had  writ- 
ten a  brochure  in  which  he  developed  a  program  for  the 
union  of  the  revolutionary  Slavs  and  for  the  destruction 
of  the  three  monarchies,  Russia,  Austria,  and  Prussia. 
He  advocated  pan-Slavism,  and  believed  that  the  Slavic 
people  could  once  more  be  united  and  then  federated 
into  a  great  new  nation.  When  Marx  saw  the  volume,  he 
wrote  in  the  Neue  Rheinische  Zeitung  (February  14, 
1849),  "Aside  from  the  Poles,  the  Russians,  and  perhaps 


160      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

even  the  Slavs  of  Turkey,  no  Slavic  people  has  a  future, 
for  the  simple  reason  that  there  are  lacking  in  all  the  other 
Slavs  the  primary  conditions — historical,  geographical, 
political,  and  industrial — of  independence  and  vital- 
ity-" (7)  This  cold-blooded  statement  infuriated  Ba- 
kounin.  He  absolutely  refused  to  look  at  the  facts.  Pos- 
sessed of  a  passion  for  liberty,  he  wanted  all  nations,  all 
peoples — civilized,  semi-civilized,  or  savage — to  be  en- 
tirely free.  What  had  historical,  geographical,  political,  or 
industrial  conditions  to  do  with  the  matter?  All  this  is 
typical  of  Bakounin's  revolutionary  sentimentalism.  He 
clashed  again  with  Marx  on  very  similar  grounds  when 
the  latter  insisted  that  only  in  the  more  advanced  coun- 
tries is  there  a  possibility  of  a  social  revolution.  Mod- 
ern capitalist  production,  according  to  Marx,  must  at- 
tain a  certain  degree  of  development  before  it  is  possible 
for  the  working  class  to  hope  to  carry  out  any  really 
revolutionary  project.  Bakounin  takes  issue  with  him 
here.  He  declares  his  own  aim  to  be  "the  complete  and 
real  emancipation  of  all  the  proletariat,  not  only  of  some 
countries,  but  of  all  nations,  civilized  and  non-civi- 
lized. (8)  In  these  declarations  the  differences  between 
Marx  and  Bakounin  stand  forth  vividly.  Marx  at  no 
time  states  what'  he  wishes.  He  expresses  no  sentiment, 
but  confines  himself  to  a  cold  statement  of  the  facts  as 
he  sees  them.  Bakounin,  the  dreamer,  the  sentimentalist, 
and  the  revolution-maker,  wants  the  whole  world  free. 
Whether  or  not  Marx  wants  the  same  thing  is  not  the 
question.  He  rigidly  confines  himself  to  what  he  believes 
is  possible.  He  says  certain  conditions  must  exist  before 
a  people  can  be  free  and  independent.  Among  them  are 
included  historical,  geographical,  political,  and  industrial 
conditions.  Marx  further  states  that,  before  the  work- 
ing-class revolution  can  be  successful,  certain  economic 


BATTLE  BETWEEN  MARX  AND  BAKOUNIN     161 

conditions  must  exist.  Marx  is  not  stating  here  conclu- 
sions which  are  necessarily  agreeable  to  him.  He  states 
only  the  results  of  his  study  of  history,  based  on  his 
analysis  of  past  events.  In  the  one  case  we  find  the 
idealist  seeking  to  set  the  world  violently  right;  in  the 
other  case  we  rind  the  historian  and  the  scientist — in- 
fluenced no  doubt,  as  all  men  must  be,  by  certain  hopes, 
yet  totally  regardless  of  personal  desire — stating  the 
antecedent  conditions  which  must  exist  previous  to  the 
birth  of  a  new  historic  or  economic  period. 

In  speaking  of  the  antagonism  between  Marx  and  Ba- 
kounin  in  this  earlier  period,  I  do  not  mean  to  convey 
the  impression  that  it  was  the  cause  of  the  dissensions 
that  arose  later.  The  slightest  knowledge  of  Bakou- 
nin's  philosophy  and  methods  is  enough  to  make  one 
realize  that  neither  the  International  nor  any  considerable 
section  of  the  labor  or  socialist  movements  had  anything 
in  common  with  those  ideas.  Certainly  the  thought  and 
policies  of  Marx  were  directly  opposed  to  everything 
from  first  to  last  that  Bakounin  stood  for.  Nothing  could 
be  more  grotesque  than  the  idea  that  Marxism  and  Ba- 
kouninism  could  be  blended,  or  indeed  exist  together, 
in  any  semblance  of  harmony.  Every  thought,  policy, 
and  method  of  the  two  clashed  furiously.  It  would  be 
impossible  to  conceive  of  two  other  minds  that  were  on 
so  many  points  such  worlds  apart.  Both  Bakounin  and 
Marx  instinctively  felt  this  essential  antagonism,  yet  the 
former  wrote  Marx,  in  December,  1868,  when  he  was 
preparing  to  enter  the  International,  assuring  him  that  he 
had  had  a  change  of  heart  and  that  "my  country,  now, 
c'est  I' Internationale,  of  which  you  are  one  of  the  princi- 
pal founders.  You  see  then,  dear  friend,  that  I  am  your 
disciple  and  I  am  proud  to  be  it." (9)  He  then  signs  him- 
self affectionately,  "Your  devoted  M.  Bakounin."  (10) 


162      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

With  an  olive  branch  such  as  that  arrived  the  new 
"disciple"  of  Marx.  He  then  set  to  work  without  a  mo- 
ment's delay  to  capture  the  International  congress  which 
was  to  be  held  at  Basel,  September,  1869.  And  it  was 
there  that  the  first  battle  occurred.  From  the  very  mo- 
ment that  the  congress  opened  it  was  clear  that  on  every 
important  question  there  was  to  be  a  division.  Most 
unexpectedly,  the  first  struggle  arose  over  a  question 
that  seemed  not  at  all  fundamental  at  the  time,  but  which, 
as  the  later  history  of  socialism  shows,  was  really  basic. 
The  father  of  direct  legislation,  Rittinghausen,  was  a 
delegate  to  the  congress  from  Germany.  He  begged  the 
congress  for  an  opportunity  to  present  his  ideas,  and  he 
won  the  support,  quite  naturally,  of  the  Marxian  ele- 
ments. In  his  preliminary  statement  to  the  congress  he 
said :  "You  are  going  to  occupy  yourselves  at  length 
with  the  great  social  reforms  that  you  think  necessary  in 
order  to  put  an  end  to  the  deplorable  situation  of  the  la- 
bor world.  Is  it  then  less  necessary  for  you  to  occupy 
yourselves  with  methods  of  execution  by  which  you  may 
accomplish  these  reforms  ?  I  hear  many  among  you  say 
that  you  wish  to  attain  your  end  by  revolution.  Well, 
comrades,  revolution,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  accomplishes 
nothing.  If  you  are  not  able  to  formulate,  after  the 
revolution,  by  legislation,  your  legitimate  demands,  the 
revolution  will  perish  miserably  like  that  of  1848.  You 
will  be  the  prey  of  the  most  violent  reaction  and  you  will 
be  forced  anew  to  suffer  years  of  oppression  and  dis- 
grace. 

"What,  then,  are  the  means  of  execution  that  democ- 
racy will  have  to  employ  in  order  to  realize  its  ideas? 
Legislation  by  an  individual  functions  only  to  the  advan- 
tage of  that  individual  and  his  family.  Legislation  by  a 
group  of  capitalists,  called  representatives,  serves  only 


BATTLE  BETWEEN  MARX  AND  BAKOUNIN     163 

the  interests  of  this  class.  It  is  only  by  taking  their  in- 
terests into  their  own  hands,  by  direct  legislation,  that 
the  people  can  .  .  .  establish  the  reign  of  social  jus- 
tice. I  insist,  then,  that  you  put  on  the  program  of  this 
congress  the  question  of  direct  legislation  by  the  peo- 
ple." (11) 

The  forces  led  by  Bakounin  and  Professor  Hins,  of 
Belgium,  opposed  any  consideration  of  this  question.  The 
latter,  in  elaborating  the  remarks  of  Bakounin,  declared : 
"They  wish,  they  say,  to  accomplish,  by  representation 
or  direct  legislation,  the  transformation  of  the  present 
governments,  the  work  of  our  enemies,  the  bourgeois. 
They  wish,  in  order  to  do  this,  to  enter  into  these  gov- 
ernments, and,  by  persuasion,  by  numbers,  and  by  new 
laws,  to  establish  a  new  State.  Comrades,  do  not  follow 
this  line  of  march,  for  we  would  perish  in  following  it  in 
Belgium  or  in  France  as  elsewhere.  Rather  let  us  leave 
these  governments  to  rot  away  and  not  prop  them  up 
with  our  morality.  This  is  the  reason :  the  International 
is  and  must  be  a  State  within  States.  Let  these  States 
march  on  as  they  like,  even  to  the  point  where  our  State 
is  the  strongest.  Then,  on  their  ruins,  we  will  place  ours, 
all  prepared,  all  made  ready,  such  as  it  exists  in  each  sec- 
tion." (12)  The  result  of  this  debate  was  that  the  fa- 
ther of  direct  legislation  was  not  allowed  time  to  pre- 
sent his  views,  and  it  is  significant  that  this  first  clash  of 
the  congress  resulted  in  a  victory  for  the  anarchists,  de- 
spite all  that  could  be  done  by  Liebknecht  and  the  other 
socialists. 

The  chief  question  on  the  program  was  the  considera- 
tion of  the  right  of  inheritance.  This  was  the  main  eco- 
nomic change  desired  by  the  Alliance.  For  years 
Bakounin  had  advocated  the  abolition  of  the  right  of  in- 
heritance as  the  most  revolutionary  of  his  economic  de- 


164      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

mands.    "The  right  of  inheritance,"  declared  Bakounin, 
"after  having  been  the  natural  consequence  of  the  vio- 
lent appropriation  of  natural  and  social  wealth,  became 
later  the  basis  of  the  political  state  and  of  the  legal  fam- 
ily.    .     .     .     It  is  necessary,  therefore,  to  vote  the  aboli- 
tion of  the  right  of  inheritance."  (13)     It  was  left  to 
George  Eccarius,  delegate  of  the  Association  of  Tailors 
of  London,  to  present  to  that  congress  the  views  of  Marx 
and  the  General  Council.     The  report  of  the  General 
Council  was,  of  course,  prepared  in  advance,  but  Bakou- 
nin's  views  were  well  known,  and  it  was  intended  as  a 
crushing  rejoinder.    "Inheritance,"  it  declared,  "does  not 
create  that  power  of  transferring  the  produce  of  one 
man's  labor  into  another  man's  pocket — it  only  relates 
to  the  change  in  the  individuals  who  yield   (sic)   that 
power.    Like  all  other  civil  legislation,  the  laws  of  inheri- 
tance are  not  the  cause,  but  the  effect,  the  juridical  conse- 
quence of  the  existing  economical  organisation  of  society, 
based  upon  private  property  in  the  means  of  production, 
that  is  to  say,  in  land,  raw  material,  machinery,  etc.    In 
the  same  way  the  right  of  inheritance  in  the  slave  is  not 
the  cause  of  slavery,  but,  on  the  contrary,  slavery  is 
the  cause  of  inheritance  in  slaves.     ...     To  proclaim 
the  abolition  of  the  right  of  inheritance  as  the  starting 
point  of  the  social  revolution  would  only  tend  to  lead 
the  working  class  away  from  the  true  point  of  attack 
against  present  society.     It  would  be  as  absurd  a  thing 
as  to  abolish  the  laws  of  contract  between  buyer  and 
seller,  while  continuing  the  present  state  of  exchange  of 
commodities.     It  would  be  a  thing  false  in  theory  and 
reactionary  in  practice."  ( 14)    Despite  the  opposition  of 
the  Marxians  at  the  congress,  the  proposition  of  Bakou- 
nin  received   thirty-two  votes   as   against   twenty-three 
given  to  the  proposition  of  the  General  Council.    As  thir- 


BATTLE  BETWEEN  MARX  AND  BAKOUNIN     165 

teen  of  the  delegates  abstained  from  voting,  Bakounin's 
resolution  did  not  obtain  an  absolute  majority,  and  the 
question  was  thus  left  undecided. 

Another  important  discussion  at  the  congress  was  on 
landed  property.    Some  of  the  delegates  were  opposed  to 
the  collective  ownership  of  land,  believing  that  it  should 
be  divided  into  small  sections  and  left  to  the  peasants 
to  cultivate.    Others  advocated  a  kind  of  communism,  in 
which  associations  of  agriculturists  were  to  work  the 
soil.    Still  others  believed  that  the  State  should  own  the 
land  and  lease  it  to  individuals.     Indeed,  almost  every 
phase  of  the  question  was  touched,  including  the  means 
of  obtaining  the  land  from  the  present  owners  and  of 
distributing  it  among  the  peasants  or  of  owning  it  col- 
lectively while  allowing  them  the  right  to  cultivate  it  for 
their  profit.    On  this  subject,  again,  Eccarius  presented 
the  views  of  Marx.     To  Bakounin,  who  expressed  his 
terror  of  the  State,  no  matter  of  what  character,  Ec- 
carius said  "that  his   relations  with  the   French  have 
doubtless  communicated  to  him  this  conception   (for  it 
appears  that  the  French  workingmen  can  never  think  of 
the  State  without  seeing  a  Napoleon  appear,  accompanied 
by  a  flock  of  cannon),  and  he  replied  that  the  State  can 
be  reformed  by  the  coming  of  the  working  class  into 
power.    All  great  transformations  have  been  inaugurated 
by  a  change  in  the  form  of  landed  property.     The  al- 
lodial system  was  replaced  by  the  feudal  system,  the 
feudal  system  by  modern  private  ownership,  and  the  so- 
cial transformation  to  which  the  new   state  of  things 
tends  will  be  inaugurated  by  the  abolition  of  individual 
property  in  land.    As  to  compensations,  that  will  depend 
on  the  circumstances.     If  the  transformation  is  made 
peacefully,    the    present    owners    will    be    indemnified. 
.     .     .     If  the  owners  of  slaves  had  yielded  when  Lin- 


j 66       VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

coin  was  elected,  they  would  have  received  a  compensa- 
tion for  their  slaves.  Their  resistance  led  to  the  abolition 
of  slavery  without  compensation  .  .  ."  (15)  The 
congress,  after  debating  the  question  at  length,  contented 
itself  with  voting  the  general  proposition  that  "society 
has  the  right  to  abolish  private  property  in  land  and  to 
make  land  the  property  of  the  community."  (16) 

The  last  important  question  considered  by  the  congress 
was  that  dealing  with  trade  unions.  The  debate  aroused 
little  interest,  although  Liebknecht  opened  the  discus- 
sion. He  pointed  out  the  great  extension  of  trade-union 
organization  in  England,  Germany,  and  America,  and  he 
tried  to  impress  upon  the  congress  the  necessity  for  vastly 
extending  this  form  of  solidarity.  And,  indeed,  it  seems 
to  have  been  generally  admitted  that  trade-union  organi- 
zation was  necessary.  No  practical  proposals  were,  how- 
ever, made  for  actually  developing  such  organizations. 
The  interesting  part  of  the  discussion  came  upon  the 
function  of  trade  unionism  in  future  society.  The  so- 
cialists were  little  concerned  as  to  what  might  happen  to 
the  trade  unions  in  future  society,  but  Professor  Hins 
outlined  at  that  congress  the  program  of  the  modern  syn- 
dicalists. It  is,  therefore,  especially  interesting  to  read 
what  Professor  Hins  said  as  early  as  1869:  "Societies  de 
resistance  (trade  unions)  will  subsist  after  the  suppres- 
sion of  wages,  not  in  name,  but  in  deed.  They  will  then 
be  the  organization  of  labor,  .  .  .  operating  a  vast 
distribution  of  labor  from  one  end  of  the  world  to  the 
other.  They  will  replace  the  ancient  political  systems : 
in  place  of  a  confused  and  heterogeneous  representation, 
there  will  be  the  representation  of  labor. 

"They  will  be  at  the  same  time  agents  of  decentraliza- 
tion, for  the  centers  will  differ  according  to  the  indus- 
tries which  will  form,  in  some  manner,  each  one  a  sep- 


BATTLE  BETWEEN  MARX  AND  BAKOUNIN     167 

arate  State,  and  will  prevent  forever  the  return  to  the 
ancient  form  of  centralized  State,  which  will  not,  how- 
ever, prevent  another  form  of  government  for  local  pur- 
poses. As  is  evident,  if  we  are  reproached  for  being  in- 
different to  every  form  of  government,  it  is  .  .  .  be- 
cause we  detest  them  all  in  the  same  way,  and  because  we 
believe  that  it  is  only  on  their  ruins  that  a  society  con- 
forming to  the  principles  of  justice  can  be  estab- 
lished."* (17) 

The  congress  at  Basel  was  the  turning  point  in  the 
brief  history  of  the  International.  Although  the  Marx- 
ists were  reluctant  to  admit  it,  the  Bakouninists  had  won 
a  complete  victory  on  every  important  issue.  Some  of 
the  decisions  future  congresses  might  remedy,  but  in  re- 
fusing even  to  discuss  the  question  of  direct  legislation 

*  In  the  English  report  of  the  discussion  Professor  Hins's 
remarks  are  summarized  as  follows :  "Hins  said  he  could  not 
agree  with  those  who  looked  upon  trade  societies  as  mere  strike 
and  wages'  societies,  nor  was  he  in  favor  of  having  central  com- 
mittees made  up  of  all  trades.  The  present  trades  unions  would 
some  day  overthrow  the  present  state  of  political  organization 
altogether;  they  represented  the  social  and  political  organization 
of  the  future.  The  whole  laboring  population  would  range  it- 
self, according  to  occupation,  into  different  groups,  and  this 
would  lead  to  a  new  political  organization  of  society.  He 
wanted  no  intermeddling  of  the  State;  they  had  enough  of  that 
in  Belgium  already.  As  to  the  central  committees,  every  trad" 
ought  to  have  its  central  committee  at  the  principal  seat  of 
manufacture.  The  central  committee  of  the  cotton  trades  ought 
to  be  at  Manchester;  that  of  the  silk  trades  at  Lyons,  etc.  He 
did  not  consider  it  a  disadvantage  that  trade  unions  kept  aloof 
more  or  less  from  politics,  at  least  in  his  country.  By  trying  to 
reform  the  State,  or  to  take  part  in  its  councils,  they  would  vir- 
tually acknowledge  its  right  of  existence.  Whatever  the  Eng- 
lish, the  Swiss,  the  Germans,  and  the  Americans  might  hope  to 
accomplish  by  means  of  the  present  political  State  the  Belgians 
repudiated  theirs." — pp.  31-2. 


168      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

many  of  the  delegates  clearly  showed  their  determination 
to  have  nothing  to  do  with  politics  or  with  any  movement 
aiming  at  the  conquest  of  political  power.  In  all  the 
discussions  the  anarchist  tendencies  of  the  congress  were 
unmistakable,  and  the  immense  gulf  between  the  Marx- 
ists and  the  Bakouninists  was  laid  bare.  The  very  foun- 
dation principles  upon  which  the  International  was  based 
had  been  overturned.  Political  action  was  to  be  aban- 
doned, while  the  discussion  on  trade  unions  introduced 
for  the  first  time  in  the  International  the  idea  of  a  purely 
economic  struggle  and  a  conception  of  future  society  in 
which  groups  of  producers,  and  not  the  State  or  the  com- 
munity, should  own  the  tools  of  production.  This  syn- 
dicalist conception  of  socialism  was  not  new.  Developed 
for  the  first  time  by  Robert  Owen  in  1833,  it  had  led 
the  working  classes  into  the  most  violent  and  bitter 
strikes,  that  ended  in  disaster  for  all  participants.  Born 
again  in  1869,  it  was  destined  to  lie  dormant  for  thirty 
years,  then  to  be  taken  up  once  more — this  time  with 
immense  enthusiasm — by  the  French  trade  unions. 

Needless  to  say,  the  decisive  victory  of  the  Bakou- 
ninists at  Basel  was  excessively  annoying  and  humiliat- 
ing to  Marx.  He  did  not  attend  in  person,  but  it  was 
evident  before  the  congress  that  he  fully  expected  that 
his  forces  would,  on  that  occasion,  destroy  root  and 
branch  the  economic  and  political  fallacies  of  Bakounin. 
He  rather  welcomed  the  discussion  of  the  differences  be- 
tween the  program  of  the  Alliance  and  that  of  the  Inter- 
national, in  order  that  Eccarius,  Liebknecht,  and  others 
might  demolish,  once  and  for  all,  the  reactionary  pro- 
posals of  Bakounin.  To  Marx,  much  of  the  program 
of  the  Alliance  seemed  a  remnant  of  eighteenth-century 
philosophy,  while  the  rest  was  pure  utopianism,  consist- 
ing of  unsound   and   impractical   reforms,   mixed  with 


BATTLE  BETWEEN  MARX  AND  BAKOUNIN     169 

atheism  and  schoolboy  declamation.  Altogether,  the  poli- 
cies and  projects  of  Bakounin  seemed  so  vulnerable  that 
the  General  Council  evidently  felt  that  little  preparation 
was  necessary  in  order  to  defeat  them.  They  seemed  to 
have  forgotten,  for  the  moment,  that  Bakounin  was  an 
old  and  experienced  conspirator.  In  any  case,  he  had 
left  no  stone  unturned  to  obtain  control  of  the  congress. 
Week  by  week,  previous  to  the  congress,  I'Egalite,  the 
organ  of  the  Swiss  federation,  had  published  articles  by 
Bakounin  which,  while  professedly  explaining  the  prin- 
ciples of  the  International,  were  in  reality  attacking  them ; 
and  most  insidiously  Bakounin's  own  program  was  pre- 
sented as  the  traditional  position  of  the  organization. 
Liberty,  fraternity,  and  equality  were,  of  course,  called 
into  service.  The  treason  of  certain  working-class  poli- 
ticians was  pointed  out  as  the  natural  and  inevitable  re- 
sult of  political  action,  while  to  those  who  had  given 
little  thought  to  economic  theory  the  abolition  of  in- 
heritances seemed  the  final  word.  Nor  did  Bakounin 
limit  his  efforts  to  his  pen.  All  sections  of  the  Alliance 
undertook  to  see  that  friends  of  Bakounin  were  sent  as 
delegates  to  the  congress,  and  it  was  charged  that  cre- 
dentials were  obtained  in  various  underhanded  ways. 
However  that  may  have  been,  the  "practical,"  "cold- 
blooded" Marx  was  completely  outwitted  by  his  "senti- 
mental" and  "visionary"  antagonist.  Instead  of  a  great 
victory,  therefore,  the  Marxists  left  the  congress  of  Basel 
utterly  dejected,  and  Eccarius  is  reported  to  have  said, 
"Marx  will  be  terribly  annoyed."  (18) 

That  Marx  was  annoyed  is  to  put  it  with  extraordi- 
nary moderation,  and  from  that  moment  the  fight  on  Ba- 
kouninism,  anarchism,  and  terrorism  developed  to  a 
white  heat.  Immediately  after  the  adjournment  of  the 
congress,  Moritz  Hess,  a  close  friend  of  Marx  and  a. 


170      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

delegate  to  the  congress,  published  in  the  Reveil  of  Paris 
what  he  called  "the  secret  history"  of  the  congress,  in 
which  he  declared  that  "between  the  collectivists  of  the 
International  and  the  Russian  communists  [meaning  the 
Bakouninists]  there  was  all  the  difference  which  exists 
between  civilization  and  barbarism,  between  liberty  and 
despotism,  between  citizens  condemning  every  form  of 
violence  and  slaves  addicted  to  the  use  of  brutal 
force."  (19)  Even  this  gives  but  a  faint  idea  of  the  bit- 
terness of  the  controversy.  Marx,  Engels,  Liebknecht, 
Hess,  Outine,  the  General  Council  in  London,  and  every 
newspaper  under  the  control  of  the  Marxists  began  to 
assail  Bakounin  and  his  circle.  They  no  longer  confined 
themselves  to  a  denunciation  of  the  "utopian  and  bour- 
geois" character  of  the  anarchist  philosophy.  They  went 
into  the  past  history  of  Bakounin,  revived  all  the  accu- 
sations that  had  been  made  against  him,  and  exposed 
every  particle  of  evidence  obtainable  concerning  his 
"checkered"  career  as  a  revolutionist.  It  will  be  remem- 
bered that  it  was  in  1869  that  Nechayeff  appeared  in 
Switzerland.  When  the  Marxists  got  wind  of  him  and 
his  doctrine,  their  rage  knew  no  bounds.  And  later  they 
obtained  and  published  in  L 'Alliance  de  la  Democratie 
Socialiste  the  material  from  which  I  have  already  quoted 
extensively  in  my  first  chapter. 

No  useful  purpose,  however,  would  be  served  in  deal- 
ing with  the  personal  phases  of  the  struggle.  Bakounin 
became  so  irate  at  the  attacks  upon  him,  several  of  which 
happened  to  have  been  written  by  Jews,  that  he  wrote 
an  answer  entitled  "Study  Upon  the  German  Jews."  He 
feared  to  attack  Marx ;  and  this  "Study,"  while  avoiding 
a  personal  attack,  sought  to  arouse  a  racial  prejudice 
that  would  injure  him.  He  writes  to  Herzen,  a  month 
after  the  congress  at  Basel,  that  he  fully  realizes  that 


BATTLE  BETWEEN  MARX  AND  BAKOUNIN     171 

Marx  is  "the  instigator  and  the  leader  of  all  this  calum- 
nious and  infamous  polemic."  (20)  He  was  reluctant, 
however,  to  attack  him  personally,  and  even  refers  to 
Marx  and  Lassalle  as  "these  two  Jewish  giants,"  but 
besides  them,  he  adds,  "there  was  and  is  a  crowd  of 
Jewish  pigmies."  (21 )  "Nevertheless,"  he  writes,  "it  may 
happen,  and  very  shortly,  too,  that  I  shall  enter  into  con- 
flict with  him,  not  over  any  personal  offense,  of  course, 
but  over  a  question  of  principle,  regarding  State  com- 
munism, of  which  he  himself  and  the  English  and  Ger- 
man parties  which  he  directs  are  the  most  ardent  par- 
tisans. Then  it  will  be  a  fight  to  the  finish.  But  there 
is  a  time  for  everything,  and  the  hour  for  this  struggle 
has  not  yet  sounded.  ...  Do  you  not  see  that  all 
these  gentlemen  who  are  our  enemies  are  forming  a  pha- 
lanx, which  must  be  disunited  and  broken  up  in  order  to 
be  the  more  easily  routed  ?  You  are  more  erudite  than  I ; 
you  know,  therefore,  better  than  I  who  was  the  first  to 
take  for  principle:  Divide  and  ride.  If  at  present  I 
should  undertake  an  open  war  against  Marx  himself, 
three-quarters  of  the  members  of  the  International  would 
turn  against  me,  and  I  would  be  at  a  disadvantage,  for  I 
would  have  lost  the  ground  on  which  I  must  stand.  But 
by  beginning  this  war  with  an  attack  against  the  rabble 
by  which  he  is  surrounded,  I  shall  have  the  majority  on 
my  side.  .  .  .  But,  ...  if  he  wishes  to  consti- 
tute himself  the  defender  of  their  cause,  it  is  he  who 
would  then  declare  war  openly.  In  this  case,  I  shall 
take  the  field  also  and  I  shall  play  the  star  role."  (22) 

This  was  written  in  October,  1869,  a  month  after  the 
Basel  congress.  On  the  1st  of  January,  1870,  the  Gen- 
eral Council  at  London  sent  a  private  communication  to 
all  sections  of  the  International,  and  on  the  28th  of 
March  it  was  followed  by  another.    These,  together  with 


172      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

various  circulars  dealing  with  questions  of  principle,  but 
all  consisting  of  attacks  upon  Bakounin  personally  or 
upon  his  doctrines,  finally  goaded  him  into  open  war 
upon  Marx,  the  General  Council,  all  their  doctrines,  and 
even  upon  the  then  forming  socialist  party  of  Germany, 
with  Bebel  and  Liebknecht  at  its  head.  During  the  year 
1870  Bakounin  was  preparing  for  the  great  controversy, 
but  his  friends  of  Lyons  interrupted  his  work  by  calling 
him  there  to  take  part  in  the  uprising  of  that  year.  He 
hastened  to  Lyons,  but,  as  we  know,  he  was  soon  forced 
to  flee  and  conceal  himself  in  Marseilles.  It  was  there, 
in  the  midst  of  the  blackest  despair,  that  Bakounin  wrote : 
"I  have  no  longer  any  faith  in  the  Revolution  in  France. 
This  nation  is  no  longer  in  the  least  revolutionary.  The 
people  themselves  have  become  doctrinaire,  as  insolent 
and  as  bourgeois  as  the  bourgeois  .  .  .  The  bour- 
geois are  loathsome.  They  are  as  savage  as  they  are 
stupid — and  as  the  police  blood  flows  in  their  veins — they 
should  be  called  policemen  and  attorneys-general  in  em- 
bryo. I  am  going  to  reply  to  their  infamous  calumnies 
by  a  good  little  book  in  which  I  shall  give  everything  and 
everybody  its  proper  name.  I  leave  this  country  with 
deep  despair  in  my  heart."  (23)  He  then  set  to  work  at 
last  to  state  systematically  his  own  views  and  to  anni- 
hilate utterly  those  of  the  socialists.  Many  of  these  doc- 
uments are  only  fragmentary.  Some  were  started  and 
abandoned;  others  ended  in  hopeless  confusion.  With 
the  most  extraordinary  gift  of  inspirited  statement,  he 
passes  in  review  every  phase  of  history,  leaping  from  one 
peak  to  another  of  the  great  periods,  pointing  his  lessons, 
issuing  his  warnings,  but  all  the  time  throwing  at  the 
reader  such  a  Niagara  of  ideas  and  arguments  that  he  is 
left  utterly  dazed  and  bewildered  as  by  some  startling 
military  display  or  the  rushing  here  and  there  of  a  mili- 


BATTLE  BETWEEN  MARX  AND  BAKOUNIN     173 

tary  maneuver.  In  Lettres  a  un  Frangais;  Manuscrit  de 
114  Pages,  ecrit  a  Marseille;  Lettre  a  Esquiros;  Pream- 
bule  pour  la  Seconde  Livraison  de  I'Empire  Knouto- 
Germanique;  Avertissement  pour  I'Empire  Knouto-Ger- 
manique;  Au  Journal  La  Liberte,  de  Bruxelles;  and 
Fragment  formant  une  Suite  de  I'Empire  Knouto-Ger- 
tnanique,  he  returns  again  and  again  to  the  charge,  al- 
ways seeking  to  deal  some  fatal  blow  to  Marxian  social- 
ism, but  never  apparently  satisfying  himself  that  he  has 
accomplished  his  task.  He  touches  the  border  of  prac- 
tical criticism  of  the  socialist  program  in  the  fragment 
entitled  Lettres  a  un  Frangais.  It  ends,  however,  before 
the  task  is  done.  Again  he  takes  it  up  in  the  Manuscrit 
ecrit  a  Marseille.  But  here  also,  as  soon  as  he  arrives 
at  the  point  of  annihilating  the  socialists,  his  task  is  dis- 
continued. In  truth,  he  himself  seems  to  have  realized 
the  inconclusive  character  of  his  writings,  as  he  refused 
in  some  cases  to  complete  them  and  in  other  cases  to 
publish  them.  Nevertheless,  we  find  in  various  places  of 
his  fragmentary  writings  not  only  a  statement  of  his 
own  views,  but  his  entire  critique  upon  socialism. 

As  I  have  made  clear  enough,  I  think,  in  my  first  chap- 
ter, there  are  in  Bakounin's  writings  two  main  ideas  put 
forward  again  and  again,  dressed  in  innumerable  forms 
and  supported  by  an  inexhaustible  variety  of  arguments. 
These  ideas  are  based  upon  his  antagonism  to  religion 
and  to  government.  It  was  always  Dieu  et  I'Etat  that 
he  was  fighting,  and  not  until  both  the  ideas  and  the  insti- 
tutions which  had  grown  up  in  support  of  "these  mon- 
strous oppressions"  had  been  destroyed  and  swept  from 
the  earth  could  there  arise,  thought  Bakounin,  a  free  so- 
ciety, peopled  with  happy  and  emancipated  human  souls. 
When  one  has  once  obtained  this  conception  of  Bakou- 
nin's fundamental  views,  there  is  little  necessity  for  deal- 


I74      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

ing  with  the  infinite  number  of  minor  points  upon  which 
he  was  forced  to  attack  the  men  and  movements  of  his 
time.  On  the  one  hand,  he  was  assailing  Mazzini,  whose 
every  move  in  life  was  actuated  by  his  intense  re- 
ligious and  political  faith,  while,  on  the  other  hand,  he 
was  attacking  Marx  as  the  modern  Moses  handing  down 
to  the  enslaved  multitudes  his  table  of  infamous  laws  as 
the  foundation  for  a  new  tyranny,  that  of  State  social- 
ism. In  1 87 1  Bakounin  ceased  all  maneuvering.  Bring- 
ing out  his  great  guns,  he  began  to  bombard  both  Maz- 
zini and  Marx.  Never  has  polemic  literature  seen  such 
another  battle.  With  a  weapon  in  each  hand,  turning 
from  the  one  to  the  other  of  his  antagonists,  he  battled, 
as  no  man  ever  before  battled,  to  crush  "these  enemies 
of  the  entire  human  race." 

There  is,  of  course,  no  possibility  of  adequately  sum- 
marizing, in  such  limited  space  as  I  have  allotted  to  it, 
the  thought  of  one  who  traversed  the  history  of  the  en- 
tire world  of  thought  and  action  in  pursuit  of  some 
crushing  argument  against  the  socialism  of  Marx.  This 
perverted  form  of  socialism,  Bakounin  maintained,  con- 
templated the  establishment  of  a  communisme  autoritaire, 
or  State  socialism.  "The  State,"  he  says,  "having  be- 
come the  sole  owner — at  the  end  of  a  certain  period  of 
transition  which  will  be  necessary  in  order  to  transform 
society,  without  too  great  economic  and  political  shocks, 
from  the  present  organization  of  bourgeois  privilege  to 
the  future  organization  of  official  equality  for  all — the 
State  will  also  be  the  sole  capitalist,  the  banker,  the 
money  lender,  the  organizer,  the  director  of  all  the  na- 
tional work,  and  the  distributor  of  its  products.  Such 
is  the  ideal,  the  fundamental  principle  of  modern  com- 
munism." (24)  This  is,  of  all  Bakounin's  criticisms  of 
socialism,  the  one  that  has  had  the  greatest  vitality.     It 


BATTLE  BETWEEN  MARX  AND  BAKOUNIN     175 

has  gone  the  round  of  the  world  as  a  crushing  blow  to 
socialist  ideals.  The  same  thought  has  been  repeated 
by  every  politician,  newspaper,  and  capitalist  who  has  un- 
dertaken to  refute  socialism.  And  every  socialist  will 
admit  that  of  all  the  attempts  to  misrepresent  socialism 
and  to  make  it  abhorrent  to  most  people  the  idea  ex- 
pressed in  these  words  of  Bakounin  has  been  the  most 
effective.  To  state  thus  the  ideal  of  socialism  is  suffi- 
cient in  most  cases  to  end  all  argument.  Add  to  this 
program  military  discipline  for  the  masses,  barracks  for 
homes,  and  a  ruling  bureaucracy,  and  you  have  complete 
the  terrifying  picture  that  is  held  up  to  the  workers  of 
every  country,  even  to-day,  as  the  nefarious,  world-de- 
stroying design  of  the  socialists. 

It  is,  therefore,  altogether  proper  to  inquire  if  these 
were  in  reality  the  aims  of  the  Marxists.  Many  sincere 
opponents  of  socialism  actually  believe  that  these  are  the 
ends  sought,  while  the  casual  reader  of  socialist  litera- 
ture may  see  much  that  appears  to  lead  directly  to  the 
dreadful  State  tyranny  that  Bakounin  has  pictured.  But 
did  Marx  actually  advocate  State  socialism?  In  the 
Communist  Manifesto  Marx  proposed  a  series  of  re- 
forms that  the  State  alone  was  capable  of  instituting. 
He  urged  that  many  of  the  instruments  of  production 
should  be  centralized  in  the  hands  of  the  State.  More- 
over, nothing  is  clearer  than  his  prophecy  that  the  work- 
ing class  "will  use  its  political  supremacy  to  wrest,  by 
degrees,  all  capital  from  the  bourgeoisie,  to  centralize 
all  instruments  of  production  in  the  hands  of  the 
State."  (25)  Indeed,  in  this  program,  as  in  all  others 
that  have  developed  out  of  it,  the  end  of  socialism  would 
seem  to  be  State  ownership.  "With  trusts  or  without," 
writes  Engels,  "the  official  representative  of  capitalist 
society — the  State — will  ultimately  have  to  undertake  the 


176      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

direction  of  production."  Commenting  himself  upon 
this  statement,  he  adds  in  a  footnote:  "I  say  'have  to.' 
For  only  when  the  means  of  production  and  distribution 
have  actually  outgrown  the  form  of  management  by 
joint-stock  companies,  and  when,  therefore,  the  taking 
them  over  by  the  State  has  become  economically  inevita- 
ble, only  then — even  if  it  is  the  State  of  to-day  that  ef- 
fects this — is  there  an  economic  advance,  the  attainment 
of  another  step  preliminary  to  the  taking  over  of  all 
productive  forces  by  society  itself."  "This  necessity," 
he  continues,  "for  conversion  into  State  property  is  felt 
first  in  the  great  institutions  for  intercourse  and  com- 
munication— the  post-office,  the  telegraphs,  the  rail- 
ways." (26) 

Here  is  the  entire  position  in  a  nutshell.  But  Engels 
says  the  State  will  "have  to."  Thus  Engels  and  Marx 
are  not  stating  necessarily  what  they  desire.  And  it 
must  not  be  forgotten  that  in  all  such  statements  both 
were  outlining  only  what  appeared  to  them  to  be  a  natu- 
ral and  inevitable  evolution.  In  State  ownership  they 
saw  an  outcome  of  the  necessary  centralization  of  capital 
and  its  growth  into  huge  monopolies.  Society  would  be 
forced  to  use  the  power  of  the  State  to  control,  and 
eventually  to  own,  these  menacing  aggregations  of  cap- 
ital in  the  hands  of  a  few  men.  Both  Marx  and  Engels 
saw  clearly  enough  that  State  monopoly  does  not  destroy 
the  capitalistic  nature  of  the  productive  forces.  "The 
modern  State,  no  matter  what  its  form,  is  essentially  a 
capitalist  machine  .  .  .  The  more  it  proceeds  to  the 
taking  over  of  productive  forces,  .  .  .  the  more  citi- 
zens does  it  exploit.  The  workers  remain  wage  work- 
ers— proletarians.  The  capitalist  relation  is  not  done 
away  with.  It  is  rather  brought  to  a  head.  But,  brought 
to  a  head,  it  topples  over.    State  ownership  of  the  pro- 


BATTLE  BETWEEN  MARX  AND  BAKOUNIN     177 

ductive  forces  is  not  the  solution  of  the  contiict,  but  con- 
cealed zvithin  it  are  the  technical  conditions  that  form  the 
elements  of  that  solution."  (27) 

State  ownership,  then,  was  not  considered  by  Marx 
and  Engels  in  itself  a  solution  of  the  problem.  It  is  only 
a  necessary  preliminary  to  the  solution.  The  essential 
step,  either  subsequent  or  precedent,  is  the  capture  of  po- 
litical power  by  the  working  class.  By  this  act  the  means 
of  production  are  freed  "from  the  character  of  capital 
they  have  thus  far  borne,  ..."  and  their  "socialized 
character"  is  given  "complete  freedom  to  work  itself 
out."  (28)  "Socialized  production  upon  a  predeter- 
mined plan  becomes  henceforth  possible.  The  develop- 
ment of  production  makes  the  existence  of  different 
classes  of  society  thenceforth  an  anachronism.  In  pro- 
portion as  anarchy  in  social  production  vanishes,  the  po- 
litical authority  of  the  State  dies  out.  Man,  at  last  the 
master  of  his  own  form  of  social  organization,  becomes 
at  +he  same  time  the  lord  over  Nature,  his  own  master — 
free. 

"To  accomplish  this  act  of  universal  emancipation  is 
the  historical  mission  of  the  modern  proletariat.  To 
thoroughly  comprehend  the  historical  conditions  and  thus 
the  very  nature  of  this  act,  to  impart  to  the  new  op- 
pressed proletarian  class  a  full  knowledge  of  the  condi- 
tions and  of  the  meaning  of  the  momentous  act  it  is 
called  upon  to  accomplish,  this  is  the  task  of  the  theoreti- 
cal expression  of  the  proletarian  movement,  scientific 
socialism."  (29) 

Engels  declares  that  the  State,  such  as  we  have  known 
it  in  the  past,  will  die  out  "as  soon  as  there  is  no  longer 
any  social  class  to  be  held  in  subjection;  as  soon  as  class 
rule,  and  the  individual  struggle  for  existence  based 
upon  our  present  anarchy  in  production,  with  the  colli- 


i;8       VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

sions  and  excesses  arising  from  these,  are  removed, 
nothing  more  remains  to  be  repressed,  and  a  special  re- 
pressive force,  a  State,  is  no  longer  necessary.  The 
first  act  by  virtue  of  which  the  State  really  constitutes 
itself  the  representative  of  the  whole  of  society — the  tak- 
ing possession  of  the  means  of  production  in  the  name 
of  society — this  is,  at  the  same  time,  its  last  independent 
act  as  a  State.  State  interference  in  social  relations  be- 
comes, in  one  domain  after  another,  superfluous,  and 
then  dies  out  of  itself ;  the  government  of  persons  is  re- 
placed by  the  administration  of  things,  and  by  the  con- 
duct of  processes  of  production.  The  State  is  not  'abol- 
ished.' It  dies  out.  This  gives  the  measure  of  the  value 
of  the  phrase  'a  free  State,'  both  as  to  its  justifiable  use 
at  times  by  agitators,  and  as  to  its  ultimate  scientific  in- 
sufficiency; and  also  of  the  demands  of  the  so-called 
anarchists  for  the  abolition  of  the  State  out  of 
hand."  (30) 

This  conception  of  the  role  of  the  State  is  one  that  no 
anarchist  can  comprehend.  He  is  unwilling  to  admit 
that  social  evolution  necessarily  leads  through  State  so- 
cialism to  industrial  democracy,  or  even  that  such  an 
evolution  is  possible.  To  him  the  State  seems  to  have  a 
corporeal,  material  existence  of  its  own.  It  is  a  tyranni- 
cal machine  that  exists  above  all  classes  and  wields  a 
legal,  military,  and  judicial  power  all  its  own.  That  the 
State  is  only  an  agency  for  representing  in  certain  fields 
the  power  of  a  dominant  economic  class — this  is  some- 
thing the  anarchist  will  not  admit.  In  fact,  Bakounin 
seems  to  have  been  utterly  mystified  when  Eccarius  an- 
swered him  at  Basel  in  these  words :  "The  State  can  be 
reformed  by  the  coming  of  the  working  class  into 
power."  (31)  That  the  State  is  but  a  committee  for 
managing  the  common  affairs  of  the  capitalist  class  can 


BATTLE  BETWEEN  MARX  AND  BAKOUNIN  179 

neither  be  granted  nor  understood  by  the  anarchists. 
Nor  can  it  be  comprehended  that,  when  the  capitalist 
class  has  no  affairs  of  its  own  to  manage,  the  coercive 
character  of  the  State  will  gradually  disappear.  State 
ownership  undermines  and  destroys  the  economic  power 
of  private  capitalists.  When  the  railroads,  the  mines, 
the  forests,  and  other  great  monopolies  are  taken  out  of 
their  hands,  their  control  over  the  State  is  by  this  much 
diminished.  The  only  power  they  possess  to  control  the 
State  resides  in  their  economic  power,  and  anything  that 
weakens  that  tends  to  destroy  the  class  character  of  the 
State  itself.  The  inherent  weakness  of  Bakounin's  en- 
tire philosophy  lay  in  this  fact,  that  it  begins  with  the 
necessity  of  abolishing  God  and  the  State,  and  that  it  can 
never  get  beyond  that  or  away  from  that.  And,  as  a 
necessary  consequence,  Bakounin  had  to  oppose  every 
measure  that  looked  toward  any  compromise  with  the 
S.ate,  or  that  might  enable  the  working  class  to  exercise 
any  influence  in  or  through  the  State. 

When,  therefore,  the  German  party  at  its  congress  at 
Eisenach  demanded  the  suffrage  and  direct  legislation, 
when  it  declared  that  political  liberty  is  the  most  urgent 
preliminary  condition  for  the  economic  emancipation  of 
the  working  class,  Bakounin  could  see  nothing  revolu- 
tionary in  such  a  program.  When,  furthermore,  the 
party  declared  that  the  social  question  is  inseparable 
from  the  political  question  and  that  the  problems  of  our 
economic  life  could  be  solved  only  in  a  democratic  State, 
Bakounin,  of  course,  was  forced  to  oppose  such  here- 
sies with  all  his  power.  And  these  were  indeed  the 
really  vital  questions,  upon  which  the  anarchists  and  the 
socialists  could  not  be  reconciled.  It  is  in  his  Lettres 
a  tin  Frangais,  written  just  after  the  failure  of  his  own 
"practical"  efforts  at  Lyons,  that  Bakounin  undertakes 


180      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

his  criticism  of  the  program  of  the  German  social- 
ists. Preparatory  to  this  task,  he  first  terrifies  his 
French  readers  with  the  warning  that  if  the  German 
army,  then  at  their  doors,  should  conquer  France,  it 
would  result  in  the  destruction  of  French  socialism  (by 
which  he  means  anarchism),  in  the  utter  degradation 
and  complete  slavery  of  the  French  people,  and  make  it 
possible  for  the  Knout  of  Germany  and  Russia  to  fall 
upon  the  back  of  all  Europe.  "If,  in  this  terrible  mo- 
ment, .  .  .  [France]  does  not  prefer  the  death  of  all 
her  children  and  the  destruction  of  all  her  goods,  the 
burning  of  her  villages,  her  cities,  and  of  all  her  houses 
to  slavery  under  the  yoke  of  the  Prussians,  if  she  does 
not  destroy,  by  means  of  a  popular  and  revolutionary 
uprising,  the  power  of  the  innumerable  German  armies 
which,  victorious  on  all  sides  up  to  the  present,  threaten 
her  dignity,  her  liberty,  and  even  her  existence,  if  she 
does  not  become  a  grave  for  all  those  six  hundred  thou- 
sand soldiers  of  German  despotism,  if  she  does  not  op- 
pose them  with  the  one  means  capable  of  conquering  and 
destroying  them  under  the  present  circumstances,  if  she 
does  not  reply  to  this  insolent  invasion  by  the  social  revo- 
lution no  less  ruthless  and  a  thousand  times  more  menac- 
ing— it  is  certain,  I  maintain,  that  then  France  is  lost, 
her  masses  of  working  people  will  be  slaves,  and  French 
socialism  will  have  lived  its  life."  (32) 

Approaching  his  subject  in  this  dramatic  manner, 
Bakounin  turns  to  examine  the  degenerate  state  of  so- 
cialism in  Italy,  Switzerland,  and  Germany  to  see  "what 
will  be  the  chances  of  working-class  emancipation  in  all 
the  rest  of  Europe."  (33)  In  the  first  country  socialism 
is  only  in  its  infancy.  The  Italians  are  wholly  ignorant 
of  the  true  causes  of  their  misery.  They  are  crushed, 
maltreated,  and  dying  of  hunger.    They  are  "led  blindly 


BATTLE  BETWEEN  MARX  AND  BAKOUNIN     i8t 

by  the  liberal  and  radical  bourgeois."  (34)  Altogether, 
there  is  no  immediate  hope  of  socialism  there.  In 
Switzerland  the  people  are  asleep.  "If  the  human  world 
were  on  the  point  of  dying,  the  Swiss  would  not  resusci- 
tate it."  (35)  Only  in  Germany  is  socialism  making 
headway,  and  Bakounin  undertakes  to  examine  this  so- 
cialism and  to  put  it  forward  as  a  horrible  example.  To 
be  sure,  the  German  workers  are  awakening,  but  they 
are  under  the  leadership  of  certain  cunning  politicians, 
who  have  abandoned  all  revolutionary  ideas,  and  are  now 
undertaking  to  reform  the  State,  hoping  that  that  could 
be  done  as  a  result  of  "a  great  peaceful  and  legal  agita- 
tion of  the  working  class."  (36)  The  very  name  Lieb- 
knecht  had  taken  for  his  paper,  the  Volksstaat,  was  in- 
famous in  Bakounin's  eyes,  while  all  the  leaders  of  the 
labor  party  had  become  merely  appendages  to  "their 
friends  of  the  bourgeois  Volkspartei."  (37)  He  then 
passes  in  review  the  program  of  the  German  socialists, 
and  points  to  their  aim  of  establishing  a  democratic 
State  by  the  "direct  and  secret  suffrage  for  all  men"  and 
its  guidance  by  direct  legislation,  as  the  utter  abandon- 
ment of  every  revolutionary  idea.  He  dwells  upon  the 
folly  of  the  suffrage  and  of  every  effort  to  remodel,  re- 
cast, and  change  the  State,  as  "purely  political  and  bour- 
geois."(38) 

Democracies  and  republics  are  no  less  tyrannical  than 
monarchies.  The  suffrage  cannot  alter  them.  In  Eng- 
land, Switzerland,  and  America,  he  declares,  the  masses 
now  have  political  power,  yet  they  remain  in  the  deepest 
depths  of  misery.  Universal  suffrage  is  only  a  new  su- 
perstition, while  the  referendum,  already  existing  in 
Switzerland,  has  failed  utterly  to  improve  the  condition 
of  the  people.  The  working-class  slaves,  even  in  the  most 
democratic  countries,  "have  neither  the  instruction,  nor 


182      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

the  leisure,  nor  the  independence  necessary  to  exercise 
freely  and  with  full  knowledge  of  the  case  their  rights 
as  citizens.  They  have,  in  the  most  democratic  countries, 
which  are  governed  by  representatives  elected  by  all  the 
people,  a  ruling  day  or  rather  a  day  of  Saturnalian  cele- 
bration: that  is  election  day.  Then  the  bourgeois,  their 
oppressors,  their  every-day  exploiters,  and  their  masters, 
come  to  them,  with  hats  off,  talk  to  them  of  equality  and 
of  fraternity,  and  call  them  the  ruling  people,  of  whom 
they  (the  bourgeois)  are  only  very  humble  servants,  the 
representatives  of  their  will.  This  day  over,  fraternity 
and  equality  evaporate  in  smoke,  the  bourgeois  become 
bourgeois  once  more,  and  the  proletariat,  the  sovereign 
people,  remain  slaves. 

"Such  is  the  real  truth  about  the  system  of  representa- 
tive democracy,  so  much  praised  by  the  radical  bour- 
geois, even  when  it  is  amended,  completed,  and  devel- 
oped, with  a  popular  intention,  by  the  referendum  or  by 
that  'direct  legislation  of  the  people'  which  is  extolled  by 
a  German  school  that  wrongly  calls  itself  socialist.  For 
very  nearly  two  years,  the  referendum  has  been  a  part  of 
the  constitution  of  the  canton  of  Zurich,  and  up  to  this 
time  it  has  given  absolutely  no  results.  The  people  there 
are  called  upon  to  vote,  by  yes  or  by  no,  on  all  the  im- 
portant laws  which  are  presented  to  them  by  the  repre- 
sentative bodies.  They  could  even  grant  them  the  in- 
itiative without  real  liberty  winning  the  least  advan- 
tage." (39)_ 

It  is  a  discouraging  picture  that  Bakounin  draws  here 
of  the  ignorance  and  stupidity  of  the  people  as  they  are 
led  in  every  election  to  vote  their  enemies  into  power. 
What,  then,  is  to  be  done?  What  shall  these  hordes  of 
the  illiterate  and  miserable  do?  If  by  direct  legislation 
they  cannot  even  vote  laws  in  their  own  interest,  how, 


BATTLE  BETWEEN  MARX  AND  BAKOUNIN      183 

then,  will  it  be  possible  for  them  ever  to  improve  their 
condition?  Such  questions  do  not  in  the  least  disturb 
Bakounin.  He  has  one  answer,  Revolution !  As  he  said 
in  the  beginning,  so  he  repeats :  "To  escape  its  wretched 
lot,  the  populace  has  three  ways,  two  imaginary  and  one 
real.  The  first  two  are  the  rum  shop  and  the  church, 
.  .  .  the  third  is  the  social  revolution."  (40)  "A  cure 
is  possible  only  through  the  social  revolution,"  (41)  that 
is,  through  "the  destruction  of  all  institutions  of  inequal- 
ity, and  the  establishment  of  economic  and  social  equal- 
ity." (42) 

However,  if  Bakounin's  idea  of  the  social  revolution 
never  altered,  the  methods  by  which  it  was  to  be  carried 
out  suffered  a  change  as  a  result  of  his  experience  in  the 
International.  In  1871  he  no  longer  advocated,  openly 
at  any  rate,  secret  conspiracies,  the  "loosening  of  evil 
passions,"  or  some  vague  "unchaining  of  the  hydra."  He 
begins  then  to  oppose  to  political  action  what  he  calls 
economic  action.  (43)  In  the  fragment — not  published 
during  Bakounin's  life — the  Protestation  de  I' Alliance,  he 
covers  for  the  hundredth  time  his  arguments  against  the 
Volksstaat,  which  is  a  "ridiculous  contradiction,  a  fiction, 
a  lie."  (44)  "The  State  .  .  .  will  always  be  an  in- 
stitution of  domination  and  of  exploitation  ...  a 
permanent  source  of  slavery  and  of  misery."  (45)  How, 
then,  shall  the  State  be  destroyed?  Bakounin's  answer 
is  "first,  by  the  organization  and  the  federation  of  strike 
funds  and  the  international  solidarity  of  strikes;  sec- 
ondly, by  the  organization  and  international  federation  of 
trade  unions ;  and,  lastly,  by  the  spontaneous  and  direct 
development  of  philosophical  and  sociological  ideas  in  the 
International.     .     .     . 

"Let  us  now  consider  these  three  ways  in  their  special 
action,  differing  one  from  another,  but,  as  I  have  just 


1 84       VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

said,  inseparable,  and  let  us  commence  with  the  organi- 
zation of  strike  funds  and  strikes. 

"Strike  funds  have  for  their  sole  object  to  provide 
the  necessary  money  in  order  to  make  possible  the  costly 
organization  and  maintenance  of  strikes.  And  the  strike 
is  the  beginning  of  the  social  war  of  the  proletariat 
against  the  bourgeoisie,  while  still  within  the  limits  of 
legality.*  Strikes  are  a  valuable  weapon  in  this  two- 
fold^ connection ;  first,  because  they  electrify  the  masses, 
give  fresh  impetus  to  their  moral  energy,  and  awaken 
in  their  hearts  the  profound  antagonism  which  exists  be- 
tween their  interests  and  those  of  the  bourgeoisie,  by 
showing  them  ever  clearer  the  abyss  which  from  this 
time  irrevocably  separates  them  from  that  class ;  and, 
second,  because  they  contribute  in  large  measure  to 
provoke  and  to  constitute  among  the  workers  of  all 
trades,  of  all  localities,  and  of  all  countries  the  con- 
sciousness and  the  fact  itself  of  solidarity:  a  double  ac- 
tion, the  one  negative  and  the  other  positive,  which  tends 
to  constitute  directly  the  new  world  of  the  proletariat 
by  opposing  it,  almost  absolutely,  to  the  bourgeois 
world."  (46) 

In  another  place  he  says:  "Once  this  solidarity  is 
seriously  accepted  and  firmly  established,  it  brings  forth 
all  the  rest — all  the  principles — the  most  sublime  and  the 
most  subversive  of  the  International,  the  most  destruc- 
tive of  religion,  of  juridical  right,  and  of  the  State,  of 
authority  divine  as  well  as  human — in  a  word,  the  most 
revolutionary  from  the  socialist  point  of  view,  being 
nothing  but  the  natural  and  necessary  developments  of 
this  economic  solidarity.    And  the  immense  practical  ad- 

*  These  are  almost  the  exact  words  that  Aristide  Briand  uses 
in  his  argument  for  the  general  strike.  See  "La  Greve  Gcn- 
crale,"  compiled  by  Lagardelle,  p.  95. 


BATTLE  BETWEEN  MARX  AND  BAKUUN1N     185 

vantage  of  the  trade  sections  over  the  central  sections 
consists  precisely  in  this — that  these  developments  and 
these  principles  are  demonstrated  to  the  workers  not  by 
theoretical  reasoning,  but  by  the  living  and  tragic  ex- 
perience of  a  struggle  which  each  day  becomes  larger, 
more  profound,  and  more  terrible.  In  such  a  way  that 
the  worker  who  is  the  least  instructed,  the  least  pre- 
pared, the  most  gentle,  always  dragged  further  by  the 
very  consequences  of  this  conflict,  ends  by  recognizing 
himself  to  be  a  revolutionist,  an  anarchist,  and  an  athe- 
ist, without  often  knowing  himself  how  he  has  become 
such."  (47) 

This  is  as  far  as  Bakounin  gets  in  the  statement  of  his 
new  program  of  action,  as  this  article,  like  many  others, 
was  discontinued  and  thrown  aside  at  the  moment  when 
he  comes  to  clinching  his  argument.  The  mountain, 
however,  had  labored,  and  this  was  its  mouse.  It  is 
chiefly  remarkable  as  a  forecast  of  the  methods  adopted 
by  the  syndicalists  a  quarter  of  a  century  later.  Never- 
theless, one  cannot  escape  the  thought  that  Bakounin's 
advocacy  of  a  purely  economic  struggle  was  only  a  last 
desperate  effort  on  his  part  to  discover  some  method  of 
action,  aside  from  his  now  discredited  riots  and  insur- 
rections, that  could  serve  as  an  effective  substitute  for 
political  action.  In  reality,  Bakounin  found  himself  in  a 
vicious  circle.  Again  and  again  he  tried  to  find  his  way 
out,  but  invariably  he  returned  to  his  starting  point.  In 
despair  he  tore  to  pieces  his  manuscript,  immediately, 
however,  to  start  a  new  one;  then  once  more  to  rush 
round  the  circle  that  ended  nowhere. 

Marx  and  Engels  ignored  utterly  the  many  and  varied 
assaults  that  Bakounin  made  upon  their  theoretical  views. 
They  were  not  the  least  concerned  over  his  attacks  upon 
their  socialism.    They  had  not  invented  it,  and  economic 


Ibo      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LAEOR  MOVEMENT 

evolution  was  determining  its  form.  It  was  not,  indeed, 
until  1875  that  Engels  deals  with  the  tendencies  to  State 
socialism,  and  then  it  was  in  answer  to  Dr.  Eugene 
Duehring,  privat  docent  at  Berlin  University,  who  had 
just  announced  that  he  had  become  "converted"  to  social- 
ism. Like  many  another  distinguished  convert,  he  imme- 
diately began  to  remodel  the  whole  theory  and  to  create 
what  he  supposed  were  new  and  original  doctrines  of  his 
own.  But  no  sooner  were  they  put  in  print  than  they 
were  found  to  be  a  restatement  of  the  old  and  choicest 
formulas  of  Proudhon  and  Bakounin.  Engels  there- 
fore took  up  the  cudgels  once  again,  and,  no  doubt  to  the 
stupefaction  of  Duehring,  denied  that  property  is  rob- 
bery, (48)  that  slaves  are  kept  in  slavery  by  force,  (49) 
and  that  the  root  of  social  and  economic  inequality  is  po- 
litical tyranny.  (50)  Furthermore,  he  deplored  this 
method  of  interpreting  history,  and  pointed  out  that  cap- 
italism would  exist  "if  we  exclude  the  possibility  of  force, 
robbery,  and  cheating  absolutely  ..."  Further- 
more, "the  monopolization  of  the  means  of  production 
.  .  .  in  the  hands  of  a  single  class  few  in  numbers 
.  .  .  rests  on  purely  economic  grounds  without  rob- 
bery, force,  or  any  intervention  of  politics  or  the  gov- 
ernment being  necessary."  To  say  that  property  rests  on 
force  "merely  serves  to  obscure  the  understanding  of 
the  real  development  of  things."  (51)  I  mention  Engels' 
argument  in  answer  to  Dr.  Duehring,  because  word  for 
word  it  answers  also  Bakounin.  Of  course,  Bakounin 
was  a  much  more  difficult  antagonist,  because  he  could 
not  be  pinned  down  to  any  systematic  doctrines  or 
to  any  clear  and  logical  development  or  statement 
of  his  thought.  Indeed,  Marx  and  Engels  seemed  more 
amused  than  concerned  and  simply  treated  his  essays  as 
a  form  of  "hyper-revolutionary  dress-parade  oratory," 


BATTLE  BETWEEN  MARX  AND  BAKOUNIN     187 

to  use  a  phrase  of  Liebknecht's.  They  ridiculed  him  as 
an  "amorphous  pan-destroyer,"  and  made  no  attempt  to 
refute  his  really  intangible  social  and  economic  theories. 
However,  they  met  Bakounin's  attacks  on  the  Inter- 
national at  every  point.  On  the  method  of  organization 
which  Bakounin  advocated,  namely,  that  of  a  federalism 
of  autonomous  groups,  which  was  to  be  "in  the  present 
a  faithful  image  of  future  society,"  Marx  replied  that 
nothing  could  better  suit  the  enemies  of  the  International 
than  to  see  such  anarchy  reign  amidst  the  workers.  Fur- 
thermore, when  Bakounin  advocated  insurrections,  up- 
risings, and  riots,  or  even  indeed  purely  economic  action 
as  a  substitute  for  political  action,  Marx  undertook  ex- 
traordinary measures  to  deal  finally  with  Bakounin  and 
his  program  of  action.  A  conference  was  therefore 
called  of  the  leading  spirits  of  the  International,  to  be 
heM  in  London  in  September,  1871.  The  whole  of  Ba- 
kounin's activity  was  there  discussed,  and  a  series  of 
resolutions  was  adopted  by  the  conference  to  be  sent  to 
every  section  of  the  International  movement.  A  number 
of  these  resolutions  dealt  directly  with  Bakounin  and  the 
Alliance,  which  it  was  thought  still  existed,  despite  Ba- 
kounin's statement  that  it  had  been  dissolved.*  But  by 
far  the  most  important  work  of  the  conference  was  a  res- 

*  One  of  the  resolutions  prohibited  the  formation  of  sectarian 
groups  or  separatist  bodies  within  the  International,  such  as 
the  Alliance  de  la  Democratic  Socialiste,  that  pretended  "to 
accomplish  special  missions,  distinct  from  the  common  purposes 
of  the  Association."  Another  resolution  dealt  with  what  was 
called  the  "split"  among  the  workers  in  the  French-speaking 
part  of  Switzerland.  Still  another  resolution  formally  declared 
that  the  International  had  nothing  in  common  with  the  infamies 
of  Nechayeff,  who  had  fraudulently  usurped  and  exploited  the 
name  of  the  International.  Furthermore,  Outine  was  instructed 
to  prepare  a  report  from  the  Russian  journals  on  the  work  of 


l88      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

olution  dealing  with  the  question  of  political  action.  It 
is  perhaps  as  important  a  document  as  was  issued  during 
the  life  of  the  International,  and  it  stands  as  the  answer 
of  Marx  to  what  Bakounin  called  economic  action  and 
to  what  the  syndicalists  now  call  direct  action.  The 
whole  International  organization  is  here  pleaded  with  to 
maintain  its  faith  in  the  efficacy  of  political  means.  Po- 
litical action  is  pointed  out  as  the  fundamental  principle 
of  the  organization,  and,  in  order  to  give  authority  to  this 
plea,  the  various  declarations  that  had  been  made  dur- 
ing the  life  of  the  International  were  brought  together. 
Once  again,  the  old  motif  of  the  Communist  Manifesto 
appeared,  and  every  effort  was  made  to  give  it  the  au- 
thority of  a  positive  law.  Although  rather  long,  the  reso- 
lution is  too  important  a  document  not  to  be  printed 
here  almost  in  full. 

"Considering  the  following  passage  of  the  preamble 
to  the  rules :  'The  economic  emancipation  of  the  work- 
ing classes  is  the  great  end  to  which  every  political  move- 
ment ought  to  be  subordinate  as  a  means;' 

"That  the  Inaugural  Address  of  the  International 
Working  Men's  Association  (1864)  states:  'The  lords 
of  land  and  the  lords  of  capital  will  always  use  their  po- 
litical privileges  for  the  defense  and  perpetuation  of  their 
economic  monopolies.  So  far  from  promoting,  they  will 
continue  to  lay  every  possible  impediment  in  the  way  of 
the  emancipation  of  labor  ...  To  conquer  political 
power  has  therefore  become  the  great  duty  of  the  work- 
ing classes ;' 

"That  the  Congress  of  Lausanne  (1867)   has  passed 

Nechayeff.  Cf.  Resolutions  II,  XVII,  XIII,  XIV,  respectively, 
of  the  Conference  of  Delegates  of  the  International  Working 
Men's  Association,  Assembled  at  London  from  17th  to  23d 
September,   1871. 


BATTLE  BETWEEN  MARX  AND  BAKOUNIN     189 

this  resolution :     'The  social  emancipation  of  the  work- 
men is  inseparable  from  their  political  emancipation ;' 

"That  the  declaration  of  the  General  Council  relative 
to  the  pretended  plot  of  the  French  Internationals  on  the 
eve  of  the  plebiscite  (1870)  says:  'Certainly  by  the 
tenor  of  our  statutes,  all  our  branches  in  England,  on  the 
Continent,  and  in  America  have  the  special  mission  not 
only  to  serve  as  centers  for  the  militant  organization  of 
the  working  class,  but  also  to  support,  in  their  respec- 
tive countries,  every  political  movement  tending  toward 
the  accomplishment  of  our  ultimate  end — the  economic 
emancipation  of  the  working  class ;" 

"Considering  that  against  this  collective  power  of  the 
propertied  classes  the  working  class  cannot  act,  as  a 
class,  except  by  constituting  itself  into  a  political  party, 
distinct  from,  and  opposed  to,  all  old  parties  formed  by 
the  propertied  classes ; 

"That  this  constitution  of  the  working  class  into  a 
political  party  is  indispensable  in  order  to  insure  the 
triumph  of  the  social  revolution  and  its  ultimate  end — 
the  abolition  of  classes; 

"That  the  combination  of  forces  which  the  working 
class  has  already  effected  by  its  economic  struggles 
ought  at  the  same  time  to  serve  as  a  lever  for  its  strug- 
gles against  the  political  power  of  landlords  and  cap- 
italists. 

"The  Conference  recalls  to  the  members  of  the  Inter- 
national: 

"That,  in  the  militant  state  of  the  working  class,  its 
economic  movement  and  its  political  action  are  indissolu- 
bly  united."  (52) 

From  the  congress  at  Basel  in  1869  to  the  conference 
at  The  Hague  in  1872,  little  was  done  by  the  Interna- 


190      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

tional  to  realize  its  great  aim  of  organizing  politically  the 
working  class  of  Europe.  It  had  been  completely  side- 
tracked, and  all  the  energies  of  its  leading  spirits  were 
wasted  in  controversy  and  in  the  various  struggles  of  the 
factions  to  control  the  organization.  It  was  a  period  of 
incessant  warfare.  Nearly  every  local  conference  was  a 
scene  of  dissension ;  many  of  the  branches  were  dis- 
solved ;  and  disruption  in  the  Latin  countries  was  gradu- 
ally obliterating  whatever  there  was  of  actual  organiza- 
tion. It  all  resolved  itself  into  a  question  of  domination 
between  Bakounin  and  Marx.  The  war  between  Ger- 
many and  France  prevented  an  international  gathering, 
and  it  was  not  until  September,  1872,  that  another  con- 
gress of  the  International  was  held.  It  was  finally  de- 
cided that  it  should  gather  at  The  Hague.  The  Com- 
mune had  flashed  across  the  sky  for  a  moment.  Insur- 
rection had  broken  out  and  had  been  crushed  in  various 
places  in  Europe.  Strikes  were  more  frequent  than  had 
ever  been  known  before.  And,  because  of  these  various 
disturbances,  the  International  had  become  the  terror  of 
Europe.  Its  strength  and  influence  were  vastly  over- 
estimated by  the  reactionary  powers.  Its  hand  was  seen 
in  every  act  of  the  discontented  masses.  It  became  the 
"Red  Spectre,"  and  all  the  powers  of  Europe  were  now 
seeking  to  destroy  it.  Looming  thus  large  to  the  outside 
world,  those  within  the  International  knew  how  baseless 
were  the  fears  of  its  opponents.  They  realized  that  in- 
ternecine war  was  eating  its  heart  out.  During  all  this 
time,  when  it  was  credited  and  blamed  for  every  revolt 
in  Europe,  there  were  incredible  plotting  and  intrigue  be- 
tween the  factions.  Endless  documents  were  printed, 
assailing  the  alleged  designs  of  this  or  that  group,  and 
secret  circulars 'were  issued  denouncing  the  character  of 
this  or  that  leader.    Sections  were  formed  and  dissolved 


BATTLE  BETWEEN  MARX  AND  BAKOUNIN     191 

in  the  maneuvers  of  the  two  factions  to  control  the  ap- 
proaching congress.  And,  when  finally  the  congress 
gathered  at  The  Hague,  there  was  a  gravity  among  the 
delegates  that  foreboded  what  was  to  come.  The  Marx- 
ists were  in  absolute  control.  On  the  resolution  to  ex- 
pel Michael  Bakounin  from  the  International  the  vote 
stood  twenty-seven  for  and  six  against,  while  seven  ab- 
stained. The  expulsion  of  Bakounin,  however,  occurred 
only  after  a  long  debate  upon  his  entire  history  and  that 
of  his  secret  Alliance.  Nearly  all  the  amazing  collection 
of  "documentary  proof,"  afterward  published  in  L' Alli- 
ance de  la  Dcmocratie  Socialiste,  was  submitted  to  the 
congress,  and  a  resolution  was  passed  that  all  the  docu- 
ments should  be  published,  together  with  such  others  as 
might  tend  to  enlighten  the  membership  concerning  the 
purposes  of  Bakounin's  organization. 

Two  other  important  actions  were  taken  at  the  con- 
gress. One  was  to  introduce  into  the  actual  rules  of  the 
Association  part  of  the  resolution,  which  was  passed  by 
the  conference  in  London  the  year  before,  dealing  with 
political  action,  and  this  was  adopted  by  thirty-six  votes 
against  five.  The  other  action  was  to  remove  the  seat  of 
the  General  Council  from  London  to  New  York.  Al- 
though this  was  suggested  by  Marx,  it  was  energetically 
fought  on  the  ground  that  it  meant  the  destruction  of  the 
International.  By  a  very  narrow  vote  the  resolution  was 
carried,  twenty-six  to  twenty-three,  a  number  of  Marx's 
oldest  and  most  devoted  followers  voting  against  the 
proposition.  No  really  satisfactory  explanation  is  given 
for  this  extraordinary  act,  although  it  has  been  thought 
since  that  Marx  had  arrived  at  the  decision,  perhaps  the 
hardest  of  his  life,  to  destroy  the  International  in  order 
to  save  it  from  the  hands  of  the  anarchists.  To  be  sure, 
Bakounin  was  now  out  of  it,  and  there  was  little  to  be 


192      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

feared  from  his  faction,  segregated  and  limited  to  cer- 
tain places  in  the  Latin  countries;  but  everywhere  the 
name  of  the  International  was  being  used  by  all  sorts  of 
elements  that  could  only  injure  the  actual  labor  move- 
ment.    The  exploits  of  Nechayeff,  of  Bakounin,  and  of 
certain   Spanish  and   Italian   sections  had  all  conveyed 
to  the  world  an  impression  of  the  International  which 
perhaps  could  never  be  altogether  erased.    Furthermore, 
in  Germany  and  other  countries  the  seeds  of  an  actual 
working-class  political  movement  had  been  planted,  and 
there  was  already  promise  of  a  huge  development  in  the 
national  organizations.     What  moved  Marx  thus  to  de- 
stroy his  own  child,  the  concrete  thing  he  had  dreamed 
of  in  his  thirty  years  of  incessant  labor,  profound  study, 
and    ceaseless    agitation,    will    perhaps    never    be    fully 
known,  but  in  any  case  no  act  of  Marx  was  ever  of 
greater  service  to  the  cause  of  labor.     It  was  a  form  of 
surgery  that  cut  out  of  the  socialist  movement  forever 
an  irreconcilable  element,  and  from  then  on  the  distinc- 
tion  between   anarchist   and   socialist   was   indisputably 
clear.     They  stood   poles  apart,  and  everyone  realized 
that  no  useful  purpose  would  be  served  in  trying  to  bring 
them  together  again. 

Largely  because  of  Bakounin,  the  International  as  an 
organization  of  labor  never  played  an  important  role; 
but,  as  a  melting  pot  in  which  the  crude  ideas  of  many 
philosophies  were  thrown— some  to  be  fused,  others  to 
be  cast  aside,  and  all  eventually  to  be  clarified  and  puri- 
fied— the  International  performed  a  memorable  service. 
During  its  entire  life  it  was  a  battlefield.  In  the  begin- 
ning there  were  many  separate  groups,  but  at  the  end 
there  were  only  two  forces  in  combat— socialists  and 
anarchists.  When  the  quarrel  began  there  was  among 
the  masses  no  sharply  dividing  line ;  their  ideas  were  in- 


BATTLE  BETWEEN  MARX  AND  BAKOUNIN     193 
coherent;  and  their  allegiance  was  to  individuals  rather 
han  to  pnncples.     Without  much  discrimination,  they 
ailed     themselves     "communists,"     "Internationalists," 
collechvists »    "anarchists,"    "socialists."      Even    the  e 
erms  they  had  not  denned,  and  it  was  only  toward  the 
nd  of  the  International  that  the  two  combatants  clash- 
ed their  pnncples  into  two  antagonistic   schools,   so- 
-ahsm   and   anarchism.     Anarchism   was   no   longer  a 
ague  undefi ned  philosophy  of  human  happiness;  it  now 

TJ     aII'       u-  and  diStinCt  fr°m  a11  other  so^ial  the- 
nes.     After  this  no  one  need   be  in  doubt  as   to  its 

waning  and  methods.    On  the  other  hand,  no  thought- 

il  person  need  longer  remain  in  doubt  as  to  the  exact 

eamng  and  methods  of  socialism.     This  work  of  defi- 

tion  and  clarification  was   the  immense  service  oer- 

rmej  by  the  International  in  its  eight  brief  years  of 

e.    Throughout  Europe  and  America,  after  1872  these 

'o  forces  openly  declared  that  they  had  nothing  in  com- 

>n  either  in  method  or  in  philosophy.    To  them  at  least 

5  International  had  been  a  university. 


CHAPTER   IX 


THE  FIGHT  FOR  EXISTENCE 


After  The  Hague  congress  the  socialists  and  anar- 
chists, divided  into  separate  and  antagonistic  groups — 
with  principles  as  well  as  methods  of  organization  that 
were  diametrically  opposed  to  each  other — were  forced 
to  undergo  a  terrific  struggle  for  existence.  Marx  had 
clearly  enough  warned  the  followers  of  Bakounin  that 
their  methods  were  suicidal.  "The  Alliance  proceeds  the 
wrong  way,"  he  declared.  "It  proclaims  anarchy  in  the 
working-class  ranks  as  the  surest  means  of  destroying 
the  powerful  concentration  of  social  and  political  forces 
in  the  hands  of  the  exploiters.  On  this  pretext  it  asks 
the  International,  at  the  moment  when  the  old  world  is 
striving  to  crush  it,  to  replace  its  organization  by  anar- 
chy." (i)  And,  as  strange  as  it  may  seem,  this  was  in 
fact  what  Bakounin  was  actually  striving  for.  In  the 
name  of  liberty  he  was  demanding  that  the  International 
be  broken  up  into  thousands  of  isolated,  autonomous 
groups,  which  were  to  do  whatever  they  pleased,  in  any 
way  they  pleased,  at  any  time  they  pleased.  This  may 
have  been,  and  doubtless  was,  in  perfect  harmony  with 
the  philosophy  of  anarchism,  but  it  had  nothing  in  har- 
mony with  the  idea  of  a  solidified,  international  organi- 
zation of  workingmen  that  Marx  was  striving  to  bring 
into  existence.  Anarchism  when  advocated  as  an  ideal 
for  some  distant  social  order  of  the  future,  concerned 
Marx  and  Engels  very  little;  indeed,  they  did  not  even 

194 


THE  FIGHT  FOR  EXISTENCE  195 

discuss  it  from  this  point  of  view.  It  was  only  when 
Bakounin  counseled  anarchy  as  a  method  of  working- 
class  organization  that  both  Marx  and  Engels  protested, 
on  the  ground  that  such  tactics  could  lead  only  to  self- 
destruction.  Neither  Bakounin  nor  his  followers  were 
convinced,  however,  and  they  set  out  bravely  after  1872 
to  put  into  practice  their  ideas.  Their  revolt  against  au- 
thority was  carried  to  its  ultimate  extreme.  How  far  the 
anarchists  were  prepared  to  go  in  their  revolt  is  indi- 
cated by  a  letter  which  Bakounin  wrote  to  La  Liberie  of 
Brussels  a  few  days  after  his  expulsion  from  the  In- 
ternational. Although  not  finished,  and  consequently  not 
sent  to  that  journal,  it  is  especially  interesting  because 
he  attacks  the  General  Council  as  a  new  incarnation  of 
the  State.  Here  his  lively  imagination  pictures  the  In- 
ternational as  the  germ  of  a  new  despotic  social  order, 
already  fallen  under  the  domination  of  a  group  of  dicta- 
tors, and  he  exclaims :  "A  State,  a  government,  a  uni- 
versal dictatorship!  The  dream  of  Gregory  VIL,  of 
Boniface  VIII.,  of  Charles  V.,  and  of  Napoleon  is  re- 
produced in  new  forms,  but  ever  with  the  same  preten- 
sions, in  the  camp  of  social  democracy."  (2)  This  is  an 
altogether  new  point  of  view  as  to  the  character  of  the 
State.  We  now  learn  that  it  means  any  form  of  cen- 
tralized organization  ;  a  committee,  a  chairman,  an  execu- 
tive body  of  any  sort  is  a  State.  The  General  Council 
in  London  was  a  State.  Marx  and  Engels  were  a  State. 
Any  authority — no  matter  what  its  form,  nor  how  con- 
trolled, appointed,  or  elected — is  a  State. 

I  am  not  sure  that  this  marks  the  birth  of  the  re- 
pugnance of  the  anarchists  to  even  so  innocent  a  form  of 
authority  as  that  of  a  chairman.  Nor  am  I  certain  that 
this  was  the  origin  of  those  ideas  of  organization  that 
make  of  an  anarchist  meeting  a  modern  Babel,  wherein 


196      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

all  seems  to  be  utter  confusion.  In  any  case,  the  Ba- 
kouninists,  after  The  Hague  congress,  undertook  to  re- 
vive the  International  and  to  base  this  new  organization 
on  these  ideas  of  anarchism.  After  a  conference  at 
Saint-Imier  in  the  Jura,  where  Bakounin  and  his  friends 
outlined  the  policies  of  a  new  International,  a  call  was 
sent  out  for  a  congress  to  be  held  in  Geneva  in  1873. 
The  congress  that  assembled  there  was  not  a  large  one, 
but,  with  no  exaggeration  whatever,  it  was  one  of  the 
most  remarkable  gatherings  ever  held.  For  six  entire 
days  and  nights  the  delegates  struggled  to  create  by  some 
magic  means  a  world-wide  organization  of  the  people, 
without  a  program,  a  committee,  a  chairman,  or  a  vote. 
No  longer  oppressed  by  the  "tyranny"  of  Marx,  or 
baffled  by  his  "abominable  intrigues,"  they  set  out  to 
create  their  "faithful  image"  of  the  new  world — an  or- 
ganization that  was  not  to  be  an  organization;  a  union 
that  was  to  be  made  up  of  fleeting  and  constantly  shift- 
ing elements,  agreeing  at  one  moment  to  unite,  at  the 
next  moment  to  divide.  This  was  the  insolvable  problem 
that  now  faced  the  first  congress  of  the  anarchists.  There 
were  only  two  heretics  among  them.  Both  had  come 
from  England;  but  Hales  was  a  "voice  crying  in  the 
wilderness,"  while  Eccarius  sat  silent  throughout  the 
congress. 

The  first  great  debate  took  place  upon  whether  there 
should  be  any  central  council.  The  English  .delegates 
believed  that  there  should  be  one,  but  that  its  power 
should  be  limited.  Other  delegates  believed  that  there 
might  be  various  commissions  to  perform  certain  neces- 
sary executive  services.  John  Hales  declared,  in  support 
of  a  central  commission,  that  it  will  promote  economy 
and  facilitate  the  work,  and  that  it  will  be  easy  to  pre- 
vent such  a  commission  from  usurping  power.  (3)    Paul 


THE  FIGHT  FOR  EXISTENCE  197 

Brousse,  Guillaume,  and  others  opposed  this  view  with 
such  heat,  however,  that  Hales  was  forced  to  respond : 
"I  combat  anarchy  because  the  word  and  the  thing  that 
it  represents  are  the  synonyms  of  dissolution.  Anarchy 
spells  individualism,  and  individualism  is  the  basis  of 
the  existing  society  that  we  desire  to  destroy.  .  .  . 
Let  us  suppose,  for  example,  a  strike.  Can  one  hope  to 
triumph  with  an  anarchist  organization?  Under  this 
regime  each  one,  being  able  to  do  what  he  pleases,  can, 
according  to  his  will,  work  or  not  work.  The  general 
interest  will  be  sacrificed  to  individual  caprice.  The 
veritable  application  of  the  anarchist  principle  would  be 
the  dissolution  of  the  International,  and  this  congress  has 
precisely  an  opposite  end,  which  is  to  reorganize  the  In- 
ternational. One  should  not  confound  authority  and 
organization,  We  are  not  authoritarians,  but  we  must  be 
organizers.  Far  from  approving  anarchy,  which  is  the 
present  social  state,  we  ought  to  combat  it  by  the  crea- 
tion of  a  central  commission  and  by  the  organization  of 
collectivism.  Anarchy  is  the  law  of  death ;  collectivism, 
that  of  life."  (4)  This  was,  as  Hales  soon  discovered, 
the  very  essence  of  heresy,  and,  when  the  vote  was  taken, 
he  was  overwhelmed  by  those  opposed  to  any  centralized 
organization. 

The  anarchists  were  not,  however,  content  merely  with 
having  no  central  council,  and  they  began  to  discuss 
whether  or  not  the  various  federations  should  vote  upon 
questions  of  principle.  The  commission  that  was  deal- 
ing with  the  revision  of  the  by-laws  recommended  that 
views  should  be  harmonized  by  discussion  and  that  any 
decisions  made  by  the  congress  should  be  enforced  only 
among  those  federations  which  accepted  its  decisions. 
Costa  of  Italy  approved  of  these  ideas.  "For  that  which 
concerns  theory,  we  can  only  discus?  and  seek  to  per- 


198      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

suade  each  other,  .  .  .  but  we  cannot  enforce,  for 
example,  ...  a  certain  political  program."  (5) 
Brousse  vigorously  opposed  the  process  of  voting  in  any 
form.  It  appeared  to  him  that  the  true  means  of  action 
was  to  obtain  the  opinion  of  everyone.  "The  vote,"  he 
declared,  "simply  divides  an  assembly  into  a  majority 
and  a  minority.  .  .  .  The  only  truly  practical  means 
of  obtaining  a  consensus  of  opinions  is  to  have  them 
placed  in  the  minutes  without  voting."  (6)  That  view 
seemed  to  prevail,  and  the  amendment  to  this  question 
suggested  by  Hales  of  England  was  voted  down  by  the 
majority! 

These  two  decisions  of  the  congress  will  convey  an 
idea  of  the  anarchist  conception  of  organization.  There 
was  to  be  no  executive  or  administrative  body.  Nor  were 
the  decisions  of  the  congress  to  have  any  authority. 
Anybody  could  join,  believing  anything  he  liked  and  do- 
ing anything  he  liked.  Only  those  federations  which  vol- 
untarily accepted  the  decisions  of  the  congress  were  ex- 
pected to  obey  them.  Matters  of  principle  were  in  no- 
wise to  be  voted  upon,  and  each  individual  was  allowed 
to  accept  or  reject  them  according  to  his  wishes.  The 
actual  rules,  adopted  unanimously,  ran  as  follows : 
"Federations  and  sections,  composing  the  Association, 
will  conserve  their  complete  autonomy,  that  is  to  say, 
the  right  to  organize  themselves  according  to  their  will, 
to  administer  their  own  affairs  without  any  exterior 
interference,  and  to  determine  themselves  the  path  they 
wish  to  follow  in  order  to  arrive  at  the  emancipation  of 
labor."  (7) 

It  was  fully  expected  that,  in  addition  to  its  work  of 
reorganization,  if  we  may  so  speak  of  it,  the  congress 
would  definitely  devise  some  method,  other  than  a  po- 
litical one,  for  the  emancipation  of  labor.     The  general 


THE  FIGHT  FOR  EXISTENCE  199 

strike  had  been  put  down  upon  the  agenda  for  discus- 
sion. In  the  report  of  the  Jura  section  it  was  declared : 
"If  the  workers  affiliated  with  the  Association  could  fix 
a  certain  day  for  the  general  strike,  not  only  to  obtain  a 
reduction  of  hours  and  a  diminution  *  of  wages,  but  also 
to  find  the  means  of  living  in  the  cooperative  workshops, 
by  groups  and  by  colonies,  we  could  not  decline  to  lend 
them  our  assistance,  and  we  would  make  appeal  to  the 
members  of  all  nations  to  lend  them  both  moral  and 
material  aid."  (8)  Unfortunately,  the  congress  had  lit- 
tle time  to  discuss  this  part  of  its  program.  In  the 
Compte-Rendu  OfRciel  there  is  no  report  of  whatever 
discussion  took  place.  But  Guillaume,  in  his  Documents 
et  Souvenirs,  gives  us  a  brief  account  of  what  occurred. 
After  two  resolutions  had  been  put  on  the  subject  they 
were  withdrawn  because  of  opposition,  and  finally  Guil- 
laume introduced  the  following: 

"Whereas  partial  strikes  can  only  procure  for  the 
workers  momentary  and  illusory  relief,  and  whereas,  by 
their  very  nature,  wages  will  always  be  limited  to  the 
strictly  necessary  means  of  subsistence  in  order  to  keep 
the  worker  from  dying  of  hunger, 

"The  Congress,  without  believing  in  the  possibility  of 
completely  renouncing  partial  strikes,  recommends  the 
workers  to  devote  their  efforts  to  achieving  an  interna- 
tional organization  of  trade  bodies,  which  will  enable 
them  to  undertake  some  day  a  general  strike,  the  only 
really  efficacious  strike  to  realize  the  complete  emanci- 
pation of  labor."  (9)  All  the  delegates  approved  the 
resolution,  excepting  Hales,  who  voted  against  it,  and 
Van  den  Abeele,  who  abstained  from  voting  because  the 
matter  would  be  later  discussed  in  Holland. 

*  Probably  intended  for  "increase  of  wages,"  but  this  is  as  it 
reads  in  the  official  report. 


200      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

It  was  of  course  inevitable  that  such  an  "organization" 
should  soon  disappear.  Vigorous  efforts  were  made  by 
a  few  of  the  devoted  to  keep  the  movement  alive,  but 
it  is  easy  to  see  that  an  aggregation  so  loosely  united,  and 
without  any  really  definite  purpose,  was  destined  to  dis- 
solution. During  the  next  few  years  various  small  con- 
gresses were  held,  but  they  were  merely  beating  a  corpse 
in  the  effort  to  keep  it  alive.  And,  while  the  Bakounin- 
ists  were  engaged  in  this  critical  struggle  with  death,  the 
spirit  that  had  animated  all  their  battles  with  Marx  with- 
drew himself.  Bakounin  was  tired  and  discouraged,  and 
he  left  his  friends  of  the  Jura  without  advice  or  assist- 
ance in  their  now  impossible  task.  Thus  precipitately 
ended  the  efforts  of  the  anarchists  to  build  up  a  new  In- 
ternational. George  Plechanoff  illuminates  the  insolvable 
problem  of  the  anarchists  with  his  powerful  statement: 
"Error  has  its  logic  as  well  as  truth.  Once  you  reject 
the  political  action  of  the  working  class,  you  are  fatally 
driven — provided  you  do  not  wish  to  serve  the  bour- 
geois politicians — to  accept  the  tactics  of  the  Vaillants 
and  the  Henrys."  (10)  That  this  is  terribly  true  is  open 
to  no  question  whatever.  And  the  anarchists  now  found 
themselves  in  a  veritable  cul-de-sac.  Like  the  poor  in 
Sidney  Lanier's  poem,  they  were  pressing 

"Against    an    inward-opening    door 
That  pressure  tightens  evermore." 

The  more  they  fretted  and  stormed  and  crushed  each 
other,  the  more  hopelessly  impossible  became  the  chance 
of  egress.  The  more  desperately  they  threw  themselves 
against  that  door,  the  more  securely  they  imprisoned 
themselves.  It  was  the  very  logic  of  their  tactics  that 
they  could  not  circumvent  so  small  an  obstacle  as  that 
inward-opening  door.     It  meant  self-destruction.     And 


THE  FIGHT  FOR  EXISTENCE  20T 

that,  of  course,  was  exactly  what  happened,  as  we  know, 
to  those  who  followed  the  vicious  round  of  logic  from 
which  Bakounin  could  not  extricate  himself.  Their 
struggle  for  an  organized  existence  was  brief,  and  at  the 
end  of  the  seventies  it  was  entirely  over. 

Naturally,  the  complete  failure  of  all  their  projects  did 
not  improve  their  temper,  and  they  lost  no  opportunity 
to  assail  the  Marxists.  The  Jura  Bulletin  of  December 
10,  1876,  translated  an  article  entitled  Poco  a  Poco,  writ- 
ten by  Andrea  Costa,  who  labeled  the  "pacific"  socialists 
"apostles  of  conciliation  and  ambiguity."  They  wish, 
said  Costa,  to  march  slowly  on  the  road  of  progress. 
"Otherwise,  indeed,  what  would  become  of  them  and 
their  newspapers?  For  them  the  field  of  fruitful  study 
and  of  profound  observations  on  the  phenomena  of  in- 
dustrial life  would  be  closed.  For  the  journalists  the 
means  of  earning  money  would  have  likewise  disappeared. 
.  .  .  Finding  the  satisfaction  of  their  own  aspirations 
in  the  present  state  of  misery,  they  end  by  becoming, 
often  without  wishing  it,  profoundly  egotistic  and  bad 
.  .  .  While  calling  themselves  socialists,  they  are 
more  dangerous  than  the  declared  enemies  of  the  popu- 
lar cause."  (11)  About  this  time  a  new  journal  ap- 
peared at  Florence  under  the  name  of  I'Anarchia  and 
announced  the  following  program:  "We  are  not  arm- 
chair (Katheder)  socialists.  We  will  speak  a  simple 
language  in  order  that  the  proletariat  may  understand 
once  for  all  what  road  it  must  follow  in  order  to  arrive 
at  its  complete  emancipation.  U Anarchia  will  fight  with- 
out truce  not  only  the  exploiting  bourgeoisie,  but  also 
the  Hew  charlatans  of  socialism,  for  the  latter  are  the 
most  dangerous  enemies  of  the  working  class."  (12) 

The  following  year  Kropotkin  wrote  two  articles  in 
the  Bulletin,  July  22  and  29,  which  vigorously  attacked 


202      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

socialist  parliamentary  tactics.  "At  what  price  does  one 
succeed  in  leading  the  people  to  the  ballot  boxes?"  he 
asks  in  the  first  article.  "Have  the  frankness  to  ac- 
knowledge, gentlemen  politicians,  that  it  is  by  inculcating 
this  illusion,  that  in  sending  members  to  parliament  the 
people  will  succeed  in  freeing  themselves  and  in  better- 
ing their  lot,  that  is  to  say,  by  telling  them  what  one 
knows  to  be  an  absolute  lie.  It  is  certainly  not  for  the 
pleasure  of  getting  their  education  that  the  German  peo- 
ple give  their  pennies  for  parliamentary  agitation.  It  is 
because,  from  hearing  it  repeated  each  day  by  hundreds 
of  'agitators,'  they  come  to  believe  that  truly  by  this 
method  they  will  be  able  to  realize,  in  part  at  least,  if  not 
completely,  their  hopes.  Acknowledge  it  for  once,  poli- 
ticians of  to-day,  formerly  socialists,  that  we  may  say 
aloud  what  you  think  in  silence :  'You  are  liars !'  Yes, 
liars,  I  insist  upon  the  word,  since  you  lie  to  the  people 
when  you  tell  them  that  they  will  better  their  lot  by 
sending  you  to  parliament.  You  lie,  for  you  yourselves, 
but  a  few  years  since,  have  maintained  absolutely  the 
contrary."  (13) 

What  infuriated  the  anarchists  was  the  amazing 
growth  of  the  socialist  political  parties.  It  was  only 
after  The  Hague  congress  that  the  socialist  movement 
was  in  reality  free  to  begin  its  actual  work.  With  ideas 
diametrically  opposed  to  those  of  the  anarchists,  the  so- 
cialists set  out  to  build  up  their  national  movements  by 
uniting  the  various  elements  in  the  labor  world.  There 
were  now  devoted  disciples  of  Marx  in  every  country  of 
Europe,  and  in  the  next  few  years,  in  France,  Belgium, 
Holland,  Norway,  Sweden,  and  Germany,  the  founda- 
tions were  laid  for  the  great  national  movements  that 
exist  to-day.  In  France,  Jules  Guesde,  Paul  Lafargue, 
and  Gabriel  Deville  launched  a  socialist  labor  party  in 


THE  FIGHT  FOR  EXISTENCE  203 

1878.  A  Danish  socialist  labor  party  was  formed  the 
same  year  by  an  agreement  with  the  trade  unions.  In 
the  early  eighties  the  Social-Democratic  Federation  was 
founded  in  England,  and  in  1881  a  congress  of  various 
groups  of  radicals,  socialists,  and  republicans  launched 
a  political  movement  in  Italy.  In  Germany  the  socialists 
had  already  built  up  a  great  political  organization.  This 
had  been  done  directly  under  the  guidance  of  Marx  and 
Engels  through  Liebknecht  and  Bebel.  Marx's  ideas 
were  there  perfectly  worked  out,  and  nothing  so  much 
as  that  living,  growing  thing  incensed  the  anarchists. 
Indeed,  they  seemed  to  be  convinced  that  there  was  more 
of  menace  to  the  working  class  in  these  growing  organi- 
zations of  the  socialists  than  in  the  power  of  the  bour- 
geoisie itself. 

The  controversial  literature  of  this  period  is  not  pleas- 
ant reading.  The  socialists  and  anarchists  were  literally 
at  each  other's  throats,  and  the  spirit  of  malignity  that 
actuated  many  of  their  assaults  upon  each  other  is  re- 
volting to  those  of  to-day  who  cannot  appreciate  the  in- 
tensity of  this  battle  for  the  preservation  of  their  most 
cherished  ideas.  And  in  all  this  period  the  socialist  and 
labor  movement  was  overrun  with  agents  provocateurs, 
and  every  variety  of  paid  police  agents  sent  to  disrupt 
and  destroy  these  organizations.  And,  as  has  always 
been  the  case,  these  "reptiles,"  as  they  were  called,  were 
advocating  among  the  masses  those  deeds  which  the  chief 
anarchists  were  proclaiming  as  revolutionary  methods. 
Riots,  insurrections,  dynamite  outrages,  the  shooting  of 
individuals,  and  all  forms  of  violence  were  being 
preached  to  the  poor  and  hungry  men  who  made  up  the 
mass  of  the  labor  movement.  Under  the  guise  of  anar- 
chists, these  "reptiles"  were  often  looked  upon  as  heroic 
figures,  and  everywhere,  even  when  they  did  not  sue- 


204      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

ceed  in  winning  the  confidence  of  the  masses,  they  were 
able  to  awaken  suspicion  and  distrust  that  demoralized 
the  movement.  The  socialists  were  assailed  as  traitors 
to  the  cause  of  labor,  because  they  were  preaching  peace- 
able methods.  They  were  accused  of  alliances  with  other 
parties,  because  they  sought  to  elect  men  to  parliament. 
They  were  denounced  as  in  league  with  the  Government 
and  even  the  police,  because  they  disapproved  of  dyna- 
mite. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  socialists  were  equally  bitter 
in  their  attacks  upon  the  anarchists.  They  denounced 
their  methods  as  suicidal  and  the  Propaganda  of  the 
Deed  as  utter  madness.  In  La  Periode  Tragique,  when 
Duval,  Decamps,  Ravachol,  and  the  other  anarchists  in 
France  were  committing  the  most  astounding  crimes, 
Jules  Guesde  and  other  socialist  leaders  condemned  these 
outrages  and  protested  against  being  associated  in  the 
public  mind  with  those  who  advocated  theft  and  murder 
as  a  method  of  propaganda.  Indeed,  the  anarchists  in 
the  late  seventies  and  in  the  eighties  lost  many  who  had 
been  formerly  friendly  to  them.  Guesde  and  Plecha- 
noff,  both  of  whom  had  been  influenced  in  their  early  days 
by  the  Bakouninists,  had  broken  with  them  completely. 
Later  Paul  Brousse  and  Andrea  Costa  left  them.  And, 
in  fact,  the  anarchists  were  now  incapable  of  any  effec- 
tive action  or  even  education.  Without  committees,  ex- 
ecutives, laws,  votes,  or  chairmen,  they  could  not  under- 
take any  work  which  depended  on  organized  effort,  and, 
except  as  they  managed  from  time  to  time  to  gain  a 
prominent  position  in  some  labor  or  radical  organization 
built  up  by  others,  they  had  no  influence  over  any  large 
body  of  people.  They  were  fighting  desperately  to  pre- 
vent extinction,  and  in  their  struggle  a  number  of  ex- 
traordinarily brilliant  and  daring  characters  came  to  the 


THE  FIGHT  FOR  EXISTENCE  205 

front.  But  during  the  next  decade  their  tragic  despera- 
tion, instead  of  advancing  anarchism,  served  only  to 
strengthen  the  reactionary  elements  of  Europe  in  their 
effort  to  annihilate  the  now  formidable  labor  and  social- 
ist movements. 

Turning  now  to  the  struggle  for  existence  of  the  so- 
cialist parties  of  the  various  countries,  there  is  one  story 
that  is  far  too  important  in  the  history  of  socialism  to 
be  passed  over.  It  was  a  magnificent  battle  against  the 
terrorists  above  and  the  terrorists  below,  that  ended  in 
complete  victory  for  the  socialists.  Strangely  enough, 
the  greatest  provocation  to  violence  that  has  ever  con- 
fronted the  labor  movement  and  the  greatest  opportunity 
that  was  ever  offered  to  anarchy  occurred  in  precisely 
that  country  where  it  was  least  expected.  Nowhere  else 
in  all  Europe  had  socialism  made  such  advances  as  in 
Germany ;  and  nowhere  else  was  the  movement  so  well 
organized,  so  intelligently  led,  or  so  clear  as  to  its  aims 
and  methods.  An  immense  agitation  had  gone  on  dur- 
ing the  entire  sixties,  and  working-class  organizations 
were  springing  up  everywhere.  Besides  possessing  the 
greatest  theorists  of  socialism,  Marx  and  Engels,  the 
German  movement  was  rich  indeed  in  having  in  its  serv- 
ice three  such  matchless  agitators  as  Lassalle,  Bebel,  and 
Liebknecht.  Lassalle  certainly  had  no  peer,  and  those 
who  have  written  of  him  exhaust  superlatives  in  their 
efforts  to  describe  this  prodigy.  He,  also,  was  a  product 
of  that  hero-producing  period  of  '48.  He  had  been  ar- 
rested in  Dusseldorf  at  the  same  time  that  Marx  and  his 
circle  had  been  arrested  at  Cologne.  He  was  then  only 
twenty-three  years  of  age.  Yet  his  defense  of  his  actions 
in  court  is  said  to  have  been  a  masterpiece.  Even  the 
critic  George  Brandes  has  spoken  of  it  as  the  most  won- 


2o6      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

derful  example  of  manly  courage  and  eloquence  in  a 
youth  that  the  history  of  the  world  has  given  us. 

Precocious  as  a  child,  proud  and  haughty  as  a  youth, 
gifted  with  a  critical,  penetrating,   and  brilliant  mind, 
and  moved  by  an  ambition  that  knew  no  bounds,  Las- 
salle,  with  all  his  powerful  passion  and  dramatic  talents, 
could  not  have  been  other  than  a  great  figure.     When  a 
man  possesses  qualities  that  call  forth  the  wonder  of 
Heine,  Humboldt,  Bismarck,  and  Brandes,  when  Bakou- 
nin  calls  him  a  "giant,"  and  even  George  Meredith  turns 
to  him  as  a  personality  almost  unequaled  in  fiction  and 
makes  a  novel  out  of  his  career,  the  plain  ordinary  world 
may  gain  some  conception  of  this  "father  of  the  German 
labor  movement."    This  is  no  place  to  deal  with  certain 
deplorable  and  contradictory  phases  of  his  life  nor  even 
with  some  of  his  mad  dreams  that  led  Bismarck,  after 
saying  that   "he  was  one  of  the  most  intellectual  and 
gifted   men  with   whom   I   have   ever  had   intercourse, 
.     .     .  "     to  add  "and  it  was  perhaps  a  matter  of  doubt 
to  him  whether  the  German  Empire  would  close  with 
the  Hohenzollern  dynasty  or  the  Lassalle  dynasty."  (14) 
Such  was  the  proud,  unruly,  ambitious  spirit  of  the  man, 
who,  in  1862,  came  actively  to  voice  the  claims  of  labor. 
Setting  out  to  regenerate  society  and  appealing  directly 
to  the  working  classes,  Lassalle  lashed  them  with  scorn. 
"You  German  workingmen  are  curious  people,"  he  said. 
"French   and   English   workingmen   have   to  be   shown 
how  their  miserable  condition  may  be  improved ;  but  you 
have  first  to  be  shown  that  you  are  in  a  miserable  con- 
dition.    So  long  as  you  have  a  piece  of  bad  sausage  and 
a  glass  of  beer,  you  do  not  notice  that  you  want  any- 
thing.    That  is  a   result  of  your  accursed  absence  of 
needs.    What,  you  will  say,  is  this,  then,  a  virtue?    Yes, 
in  the  eyes  of  the  Christian  preacher  of  morality  it  is  cer- 


THE  FIGHT  FOR  EXISTENCE  207 

tainly  a  virtue.  Absence  of  needs  is  the  virtue  of  the  In- 
dian pillar  saint  and  of  the  Christian  monk,  but  in  the 
eyes  of  the  student  of  history  and  the  political  econ- 
omist it  is  quite  a  different  matter.  Ask  all  political 
economists  what  is  the  greatest  misfortune  for  a  nation? 
The  absence  of  wants.  For  these  are  the  spurs  of  its 
development  and  of  civilization.  The  Neapolitan  la- 
zaroni  are  so  far  behind  in  civilization,  because  they  have 
no  wants,  because  they  stretch  themselves  out  content- 
edly and  warm  themselves  in  the  sun  when  they  have 
secured  a  handful  of  macaroni.  Why  is  the  Russian 
Cossack  so  backward  in  civilization?  Because  he  eats 
tallow  candles  and  is  happy  when  he  can  fuddle  him- 
self on  bad  liquor.  To  have  as  many  needs  as  possible, 
but  to  satisfy  them  in  an  honorable  and  respectable  way, 
that  is  the  virtue  of  the  present,  of  the  economic  age! 
And,  so  long  as  you  do  not  understand  and  follow  that 
truth,  I  shall  preach  in  vain."  (15)  Other  nations  may 
be  slaves,  he  added,  recalling  the  words  of  Ludwig  Borne ; 
they  may  be  put  in  chains  and  be  held  down  by  force, 
but  the  Germans  are  flunkies — it  is  not  necessary  to  lay 
chains  on  them — they  may  be  allowed  to  wander  free 
about  the  house.  Yet,  while  thus  shaming  the  working 
classes,  he  pleaded  their  cause  as  no  other  one  has 
pleaded  it,  and,  after  humiliating  them,  he  held  them 
spellbound,  as  he  traced  the  great  role  the  working  classes 
were  destined  to  play  in  the  regeneration  of  all  society. 
The  socialism  of  Lassalle  had  much  in  common  with 
that  of  Louis  Blanc,  and  his  theory  of  cooperative  enter- 
prises subsidized  by  the  State  was  almost  identical. 
Chiefly  toward  this  end  he  sought  to  promote  working- 
class  organization,  although  he  also  believed  that  the 
working  classes  would  eventually  gain  control  of  the  en- 
tire State  and,  through  it,  reorganize  production.     He 


208      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

agitated  for  universal  suffrage  and  even  plotted  with 
Bismarck  to  obtain  it.  He  was  confident  that  an  indus- 
trial revolution  was  inevitable.  The  change  "will  either 
come  in  complete  legality,"  he  said,  "and  with  all  the 
blessings  of  peace — if  people  are  only  wise  enough  to 
resolve  that  it  shall  be  introduced  in  time  and  from 
above — or  it  will  one  day  break  in  amid  all  the  convul- 
sions of  violence,  with  wild,  flowing  hair,  and  iron  san- 
dals upon  its  feet.  In  one  way  or  the  other  it  will  come 
at  all  events,  and  when,  shutting  myself  from  the  noise 
of  the  day,  I  lose  myself  in  history — then  I  hear  its 
tread.  But  do  you  not  see,  then,  that,  in  spite  of  this 
difference  in  what  we  believe,  our  endeavors  go  hand  in 
hand?  You  do  not  believe  in  revolution,  and  therefore 
you  want  to  prevent  it.  Good,  do  that  which  is  your 
duty.  But  I  do  believe  in  revolution,  and,  because  I  be- 
lieve in  it,  I  wish,  not  to  precipitate  it — for  I  have  al- 
ready told  you  that  according  to  my  view  of  history  the 
efforts  of  a  tribune  are  in  this  respect  necessarily  as  im- 
potent as  the  breath  of  my  mouth  would  be  to  unfetter 
the  storm  upon  the  sea — but  in  case  it  should  come,  and 
from  below,  I  will  humanize  it,  civilize  it  before- 
hand." (16)  Thus  Lassalle  saw  that  "to  wish  to  make  a 
revolution  is  the  foolishness  of  immature  men  who  have 
no  knowledge  of  the  laws  of  history."  (17)  Yet  he 
stated  also  that,  if  a  revolution  is  imminent,  it  is  equally 
childish  for  the  powerful  to  think  they  can  stem  it. 
"Revolution  is  an  overturning,  and  a  revolution  always 
takes  place — whether  it  be  with  or  without  force  is  a 
matter  of  no  importance  .  .  .  when  an  entirely  new 
principle  is  introduced  in  the  place  of  the  existing  order. 
Reform,  on  the  other  hand,  takes  place  when  the  princi- 
ple of  the  existing  order  is  retained,  but  is  developed  to 
more  liberal  or  more  consequent  and  just  conclusions. 


THE  FIGHT  FOR  EXISTENCE  209 

Here,  again,  the  question  of  means  is  of  no  importance. 
A  reform  may  be  effected  by  insurrection  and  bloodshed, 
and  a  revolution  may  take  place  in  the  deepest 
peace."  (18) 

Through  the  agitation  of  Lassalle,  the  Universal  Ger- 
man Working  Men's  Association  was  organized,  and  it 
was  his  work  for  that  body  that  won  him  fame  as  the 
founder  of  the  German  labor  movement.  Not  a  laborer 
himself,  nor  indeed  speaking  to  them  as  one  of  them- 
selves, he  led  a  life  that  would  probably  have  ended  dis- 
astrously, even  to  the  cause  itself,  had  it  not  been  for  his 
dramatic  ending  through  the  love  affair  and  the  duel. 
Fate  was  kind  to  Lassalle  in  that  he  lived  only  so  long 
as  his  influence  served  the  cause  of  the  workers,  and  in 
that  death  took  him  before  life  shattered  another  idol 
of  the  masses.  "One  of  two  things,"  said  Lassalle  once 
before  his  judges.  "Either  let  us  drink  Cyprian  wine 
and  kiss  beautiful  maidens — in  other  words,  indulge  in 
the  most  common  selfishness  of  pleasure — or,  if  we  are 
to  speak  of  the  State  and  morality,  let  us  dedicate  all  our 
powers  to  the  improvement  of  the  dark  lot  of  the  vast 
majority  of  mankind,  out  of  whose  night-covered  floods 
we,  the  propertied  class,  only  rise  like  solitary  pillars,  as 
if  to  show  how  dark  are  those  floods,  how  deep  is  their 
abyss."  (19)  With  such  marvelous  pictures  as  this  Las- 
salle created  a  revolution  in  the  thought  and  even  in  the 
action  of  the  working  classes  of  Germany.  At  times  he 
drank  Cyprian  wines,  and  what  might  have  happened 
had  he  lived  no  one  can  tell.  But  he  was  indeed  at  the 
time  a  "solitary  pillar,"  rising  out  of  "night-covered 
floods,"  a  heroic  figure,  who  is  even  to-day  an  unforgetta- 
ble memory. 

Bebel  and  Liebknecht  appeared  in  the  German  move- 
ment as  influential  figures  only  after  the  disappearance 


210       \  10LENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

of  Lassalle.  And,  while  the  labor  movement  was  already 
launched,  it  was  in  a  deplorable  condition  when  these  two 
began  their  great  work  of  uniting  the  toilers  and  organiz- 
ing a  political  party.  One  of  the  first  difficult  tasks 
placed  before  them  was  to  root  out  of  the  labor  move- 
ment the  corruption  which  Bismarck  had  introduced  into 
it.  That  great  and  rising  statesman  was  a  practical  poli- 
tician not  excelled  even  in  America.  In  the  most  cold- 
blooded manner  he  sought  to  buy  men  and  movements. 
For  various  reasons  of  his  own  he  wanted  the  support 
of  the  working-class;  and,  as  early  as  1864,  he  em- 
ployed Lothar  Bucher,  an  old  revolutionist  who  had  been 
intimately  associated  with  Marx.  Possessed  of  remark- 
able intellectual  gifts  and  an  easy  conscience,  Bucher 
was  of  invaluable  service  to  Bismarck,  both  in  his  knowl- 
edge of  the  inside  workings  of  the  labor  and  socialist 
movement  and  as  a  go-between  when  the  Iron  Chancel- 
lor had  any  dealings  with  the  socialists.  Through  Bucher, 
Bismarck  tried  to  bribe  even  Marx,  and  offered  him  a 
position  on  the  Government  official  newspaper,  the 
Staats  Anzeiger.  Bucher  was  also  an  intimate  friend  of 
Lassalle's,  and  it  was  doubtless  through  him  that  Bis- 
marck arranged  his  secret  conferences  with  Lassalle. 
The  latter  left  no  account  of  their  relations,  and  it  is 
difficult  now  to  know  how  intimate  they  were  or  who 
first  sought  to  establish  them.  About  all  that  is  known 
is  what  Bismarck  himself  said  in  the  Reichstag  when 
Bebel  forced  him  to  admit  that  he  had  conferred  fre- 
quently with  Lassalle :  "Lassalle  himself  wanted  urgently 
to  enter  into  negotiations  with  me."  (20)  It  is  known 
that  Lassalle  sent  to  the  Chancellor  numerous  communi- 
cations, and  that  one  of  his  letters  to  the  secretary  of  the 
Universal  Association  reads,  "The  things  sent  to  Bis- 
marck    should    go     in    an     envelope"     marked     "Per- 


THE  FIGHT  FOR  EXISTENCE  21 1 

sonal."  (21)  Liebknecht  later  exposed  August  Brass 
as  in  the  employ  of  Bismarck,  although  he  was  a  "red 
republican,"  who  had  started  a  journal  and  had  obtained 
Liebknecht's  cooperation.  Furthermore,  when  he  was 
tried  for  high  treason  in  1872,  Liebknecht  declared  that 
Bismarck's  agents  had  tried  to  buy  him.  "Bismarck  takes 
not  only  money,  but  also  men,  where  he  finds  them.  It 
does  not  matter  to  what  party  a  man  belongs.  That  is 
immaterial  to  him.  He  even  prefers  renegades,  for  a 
renegade  is  a  man  without  honor  and,  consequently,  an 
instrument  without  will  power — as  if  dead — in  the  hands 
of  the  master."  (22)  "I  do  not  need  to  say  .  .  . 
that  I  repelled  Bismarck's  offers  of  corruption  with  the 
scorn  which  they  merited,"  Liebknecht  continues.  "If  I 
had  not  done  so,  if  I  had  been  infamous  enough  to  sacri- 
fice my  principles  to  my  personal  interest,  I  would  be  in 
a  brilliant  position,  instead  of  on  the  bench  of  the  ac- 
cused where  I  have  been  sent  by  those  who,  years  ago, 
tried  in  vain  to  buy  me."  (23)  As  early  as  1865  Marx 
and  Engels  had  to  withdraw  from  their  collaboration 
with  Von  Schweitzer  in  his  journal,  the  Sozialdemokrat, 
because  it  was  suspected  that  he  had  sold  out  to  Bis- 
marck. This  was  followed  by  Bebel's  and  Liebknecht's 
war  on  Von  Schweitzer  because  of  his  relations  to  Bis- 
marck. Von  Schweitzer,  as  the  successor  of  Lassalle  at 
the  head  of  the  Universal  Working  Men's  Association, 
occupied  a  powerful  position,  and  the  quarrels  between 
the  various  elements  in  the  labor  movement  were  at  this 
time  almost  fatal  to  the  cause.  However,  various  repre- 
sentatives of  the  working  class  already  sat  in  Parliament, 
and  among  them  were  Bebel  and  Liebknecht. 

The  exposures  of  Liebknecht  and  Bebel  proved  not 
only  ruinous  to  Von  Schweitzer,  but  excessively  annoying 
to  Bismarck,  and  as  early  as  1871  he  wanted  to  begin  a 


212       VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

war  upon  the  Marxian  socialists.  In  1874  he  actually 
began  his  attempts  to  crush  what  he  could  no  longer  cor- 
rupt or  control.  He  became  more  and  more  enraged  at 
the  attitude  of  the  socialists  toward  him  personally. 
Moreover,  they  were  no  longer  advocating  cooperative 
associations  subsidized  by  the  State ;  they  were  now 
propagating  everywhere  republican  and  socialist  ideas. 
He  tried  in  various  ways  to  rid  the  country  of  the  two 
chief  malcontents,  Bebel  and  Liebknecht,  but  even  their 
arrests  seemed  only  to  add  to  their  fame  and  to  spread 
more  throughout  the  masses  their  revolutionary  views. 
He  says  himself  that  he  was  awakened  to  the  iniquity  of 
their  doctrines  when  they  defended  the  republican  prin- 
ciples of  the  Paris  workmen  in  1871.  At  his  trial  in 
1872  Liebknecht  stated  with  perfect  frankness  his  re- 
publican principles.  ''Gentlemen  Judges  and  Jurors,  I 
do  not  disown  my  past,  my  principles,  and  my  convic- 
tions. I  deny  nothing;  I  conceal  nothing.  And,  in  order 
to  show  that  I  am  an  adversary  of  monarchy  and  of 
present  society,  and  that  when  duty  calls  me  I  do  not 
recoil  before  the  struggle,  there  was  truly  no  need  of  the 
foolish  inventions  of  the  policemen  of  Giessen.  I  say 
here  freely  and  openly:  Since  I  have  been  capable  of 
thinking  I  have  been  a  republican,  and  I  shall  die  a  re- 
publican. (24)  .  .  .  If  I  have  had  to  undergo  un- 
heard of  persecutions  and  if  I  am  poor,  that  is  nothing 
to  be  ashamed  of — no,  I  am  proud  of  it,  for  that  is  the 
most  eloquent  witness  of  my  political  integrity.  Yet, 
once  more,  I  am  not  a  conspirator  by  profession.  Call 
me,  if  you  will,  a  soldier  of  the  Revolution — /  do  not 
object  to  that. 

"From  my  youth  a  double  ideal  has  soared  above  me : 
Germany  free  and  united  and  the  emancipation  of  the 
working  people,  that  is  to  say,  the  suppression  of  class 


THE  FIGHT  FOR  EXISTENCE  213 

domination,  which  is  synonymous  with  the  liberation  of 
humanity.  For  this  double  end  I  have  struggled  with 
all  my  strength,  and  for  this  double  end  I  will  struggle 
as  long  as  a  breath  of  life  remains  in  me.     Duty  wills 

it!"  (25) 

Such  doctrines  must  of  course  be  suppressed,  and  the 

exposure  of  those  who  had  relations  with  Bismarck 
made  it  impossible  for  him  longer  to  deal  even  with  a 
section  of  the  labor  movement.  The  result  was  that 
persecutions  were  begun  on  both  the  Lassalleans  and  the 
Marxists.  And  it  was  largely  this  new  policy  of  repres- 
sion that  forced  the  warring  labor  groups  in  1875  to 
meet  in  conference  at  Gotha  and  to  unite  in  one  organi- 
zation. In  the  following  election,  1877,  the  united  party 
polled  nearly  five  hundred  thousand  votes,  or  about  ten 
per  cent,  of  all  the  votes  cast  in  Germany.  It  now  had 
twelve  members  in  the  Reichstag,  and  Bismarck  saw  very 
clearly  that  a  force  was  rising  in  Germany  that  threat- 
ened not  only  him  but  his  beloved  Hohenzollern  dynasty 
itself. 

For  years  most  of  its  opponents  comforted  themselves 
with  the  belief  that  socialism  was  merely  a  temporary 
disturbance  which,  if  left  alone,  would  run  its  course 
and  eventually  die  out.  Again  and  again  its  militant 
enemies  had  discussed  undertaking  measures  against  it, 
but  the  wiser  heads  prevailed  until  1877,  when  the  so- 
cialists polled  a  great  vote.  And,  of  course,  when  it  was 
once  decided  that  socialism  must  be  stamped  out,  a  really 
good  pretext  was  soon  found  upon  which  repressive 
measures  might  be  taken.  I  have  already  mentioned 
that  on  May  II,  1878,  Emperor  William  was  shot  at  by 
Hodel.  It  was,  of  course,  natural  that  the  reactionaries 
should  make  the  most  possible  of  this  act  of  the  would-be 
assassin,  and,  when  photographs  of  several  prominent  so- 


214 


VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 


cialists  were  found  on  his  person,  a  great  clamor  arose 
for  a  coercive  law  to  destroy  the  social  democrats.  The 
question  was  immediately  discussed  in  the  Reichstag,  but 
the  moderate  forces  prevailed,  and  the  bill  was  rejected. 
Hardly,  however,  had  the  discussion  ended  before  a  sec- 
ond attempt  was  made  on  the  life  of  the  aged  sovereign. 
This  time  it  was  Dr.  Karl  Nobiling  who,  on  June  2,  1878, 
fired  at  the  Emperor  from  an  upper  window  in  the  main 
street  of  Berlin.  In  this  case,  the  Emperor  was  se- 
verely wounded,  and,  in  the  panic  that  ensued,  even  the 
moderate  elements  agreed  that  social  democracy  must  be 
suppressed.  Various  suggestions  were  made.  Some  pro- 
posed the  blacklisting  of  all  workmen  who  avowed  social- 
ist principles,  while  others  suggested  that  all  socialists 
should  be  expelled  from  the  country.  To  exile  half  a 
million  voters  was,  however,  a  rather  large  undertaking, 
and,  in  any  case,  Bismarck  had  his  own  plans.  First  he 
precipitated  a  general  election,  giving  the  socialists  no 
time  to  prepare  their  campaign.  As  a  result,  their  mem- 
bers in  the  Reichstag  were  diminished  in  number,  and 
their  vote  throughout  the  country  decreased  by  over  fifty 
thousand.  When  the  Reichstag  again  assembled,  Bis- 
marck laid  before  it  his  bill  against  "the  publicly  dan- 
gerous endeavors  of  social-democracy."  The  statement 
accompanying  the  bill  sought  to  justify  its  repressive 
measures  by  citing  in  the  preamble  the  two  attempts 
made  upon  the  Emperor,  and  by  stating  the  conviction 
of  the  Federal  Government  that  extraordinary  measures 
must  be  taken.  A  battle  royal  occurred  in  the  Reich- 
stag between  Bismarck  on  the  one  side  and  Bebel  and 
Liebknecht  on  the  other.  Nevertheless,  the  bill  became 
a  law  in  October  of  that  year. 

The  anti-socialist  law  was  intended  to  cut  off  every 
legal  and   peaceable   means   of   advancing  the   socialist 


THE  FIGHT  FOR  EXISTENCE 


215 


cause.  It  was  determined  that  the  German  social  demo- 
crats must  be  put  mentally,  morally,  and  physically  upon 
the  rack.  Even  the  briefest  summary  of  the  provisions 
of  the  anti-socialist  law  will  illustrate  how  determined  the 
reactionaries  were  to  annihilate  utterly  the  socialist  move- 
ment.   The  chief  measures  were  as  follows : 

/.     Prohibitory 

1.  The  formation  or  existence  of  organizations 
which  sought  by  social-democratic,  socialistic,  or 
communistic  movements  to  subvert  the  present  State 
and  social  order  was  prohibited.  The  prohibition 
was  also  extended  to  organizations  exhibiting  tend- 
encies which  threatened  to  endanger  the  public  peace 
and  amity  between  classes. 

2.  The  right  of  assembly  was  greatly  restricted. 
All  meetings  in  which  social-democratic,  socialistic, 
or  communistic  tendencies  came  to  light  were  to  be 
dissolved.  Public  festivities  and  processions  were 
regarded  as  meetings. 

3.  Social-democratic,  socialistic,  and  communistic 
publications  of  all  kinds  were  to  be  interdicted,  the 
local  police  dealing  with  home  publications  and  the 
Chancellor  with  foreign  ones. 

4.  Stocks  of  prohibited  works  were  to  be  con- 
fiscated, and  the  type,  stones,  or  other  apparatus  used 
for  printing  might  be  likewise  seized,  and,  on  the 
interdict  being  confirmed,  be  made  unusable. 

5.  The  collection  of  money  in  behalf  of  social- 
democratic,  socialistic,  or  communistic  movements 
was  forbidden,  as  were  public  appeals  for  help. 

//.     Penal 

1.  *Any  person  associating  himself  as  member  or 
otherwise  with  a  prohibited  organization  was  liable 


2i6      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

to  a  fine  of  500  marks  or  three  months'  imprison- 
ment, and  a  similar  penalty  was  incurred  by  anyone 
who  gave  a  prohibited  association  or  meeting  a  place 
of  assembly. 

2.  The  circulation  or  printing  of  a  prohibited  pub- 
lication entailed  a  fine  not  exceeding  one  thousand 
marks  or  imprisonment  up  to  six  months. 

3.  Convicted  agitators  might  be  expelled  from  a 
certain  locality  or  from  a  governmental  district,  and 
foreigners  be  expelled  from  federal  territory. 

4.  Innkeepers,  printers,  booksellers,  and  owners 
of  lending  libraries  and  reading  rooms  who  circu- 
lated interdicted  publications  might,  besides  being 
imprisoned,  be  deprived  of  their  vocations. 

5.  Persons  who  were  known  to  be  active  social- 
ists, or  who  had  been  convicted  under  this  law,  might 
be  refused  permission  publicly  to  circulate  or  sell 
publications,  and  any  violation  of  the  provision 
against  the  circulation  of  socialistic  literature  in 
inns,  shops,  libraries,  and  newsrooms  was  punish- 
able with  a  fine  of  one  thousand  marks  or  imprison- 
ment for  six  months. 

77/.     Power  conferred  upon  authorities. 

1.  Meetings  may  only  take  place  with  the  previ- 
ous sanction  of  the  police,  but  this  restriction  does 
not  extend  to  meetings  held  in  connection  with  elec- 
tions to  the  Reichstag  or  the  Diets. 

2.  The  circulation  of  publications  may  not  take 
place  without  permission  in  public  roads,  streets, 
squares,  or  other  public  places. 

3.  Persons  from  whom  danger  to  the  public  se- 
curity or  order  is  apprehended  may  be  refused  resi- 
dence in  a  locality  or  governmental  district. 


THE  FIGHT  FOR  EXISTENCE  217 

4.  The  possession,  carrying,  introduction,  and 
sale  of  weapons  within  the  area  affected  are  forbid- 
den, restricted,  or  made  dependent  on  certain  con- 
ditions. All  ordinances  issued  on  the  strength  of 
this  section  were  to  be  notified  at  once  to  the  Reich- 
stag and  to  be  published  in  the  official  Gazette.  (26) 

When  this  law  went  into  effect,  the  outlook  for  the  la- 
bor movement  seemed  utterly  black  and  hopeless.  Every 
path  seemed  closed  to  it  except  that  of  violence.  Imme- 
diately many  places  in  Germany  were  put  under  martial 
law.  Societies  were  dissolved,  newspapers  suppressed, 
printing  establishments  confiscated,  and  in  a  short  time 
fifty  agitators  had  been  expelled  from  Berlin  alone.  A 
reign  of  official  tyranny  and  police  persecution  was  estab- 
lished, and  even  the  employers  undertook  to  impoverish 
and  to  blacklist  men  who  were  thought  to  hold  socialist 
views.  Within  a  few  weeks  every  society,  periodical, 
and  agitator  disappeared,  and  not  a  thing  seemed  left  of 
the  great  movement  of  half  a  million  men  that  had  ex- 
isted a  few  weeks  before.  There  have  been  many  simi- 
lar situations  that  have  faced  the  socialist  and  labor 
movements  of  other  countries.  England  and  France  had 
undergone  similar  trials.  Even  to-day  in  America  we 
find,  at  certain  times  and  in  certain  places,  a  situation 
altogether  similar.  In  Colorado  during  the  recent  labor 
wars  and  in  West  Virginia  during  the  early  months  of 
1913  every  tyranny  that  existed  in  Germany  in  1879 
was  repeated  here.  Infested  with  spies  seeking  to  en- 
courage violence,  brutally  maltreated  by  the  officials  of 
order,  their  property  confiscated  by  the  military,  masses 
thrown  into  prison  and  other  masses  exiled,  even  the 
right  of  assemblage  and  of  free  spech  denied  them — 
these  are  the  exactlv  similar  conditions  which  have  ex- 


2i8       VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

isted  in  all  countries  when  efforts  have  been  made  to 
crush  the  labor  movement. 

And  in  all  countries  where  such  conditions  exist  cer- 
tain minds  immediately  clamor  for  what  is  called  "ac- 
tion." They  want  to  answer  violence  with  violence ;  they 
want  to  respond  to  the  terrorism  of  the  Government  with 
a  terrorism  of  their  own.  And  in  Germany  at  this  time 
there  were  a  number  who  argued  that,  as  they  were  in 
fact  outlaws,  why  should  they  not  adopt  the  tactics  of 
outlaws?  Should  men  peaceably  and  quietly  submit  to 
every  insult  and  every  form  of  tyranny — to  be  thrown 
in  jail  for  speaking  the  dictates  of  their  conscience  and 
even  to  be  hung  for  preaching  to  their  comrades  the 
necessity  of  a  nobler  and  better  social  order?  If  Bis- 
marck and  his  police  forces  have  the  power  to  outlaw  us, 
have  we  not  the  right  to  exercise  the  tactics  of  outlaws? 
"All  measures,"  cried  Most  from  London,  "are  legiti- 
mate against  tyrants;"  (27)  while  Hasselmann,  his 
friend,  advised  an  immediate  insurrection,  which,  even 
though  it  should  fail,  would  be  good  propaganda.  It 
was  inevitable  that  in  the  early  moments  of  despair  some 
of  the  German  workers  should  have  listened  gladly  to 
such  proposals.  And,  indeed,  it  may  seem  somewhat  of 
a  miracle  that  any  large  number  of  the  German  workers 
should  have  been  willing  to  have  listened  to  any  other 
means  of  action.    What  indeed  else  was  there  to  do? 

It  is  too  long  a  story  to  go  into  the  discussions  over 
this  question.  Perhaps  a  principle  of  Bebel's  gives  the 
clearest  explanation  of  the  thought  which  eventually  de- 
cided the  tactics  of  the  socialists.  Bebel  has  said  many 
times  that  he  always  considered  it  wise  in  politics  to  find 
out  what  his  opponent  wanted  him  to  do,  and  then  not 
to  do  it.  And,  to  the  minds  of  Bebel,  Liebknecht,  and 
others  of  the  more  clear-headed  leaders,  there  was  no 


THE  FIGHT  FOR  EXISTENCE  219 

doubt  whatever  that  Bismarck  was  trying  to  force  the 
socialists  to  commit  crimes  and  outrages.  Again  and 
again  Bismarck's  press  declared :  "What  is  most  neces- 
sary is  to  provoke  the  social-democrats  to  commit  acts  of 
despair,  to  draw  them  into  the  open  street,  and  there  to 
shoot  them  down."  (28)  Well,  if  this  was  actually  what 
Bismarck  wanted,  he  failed  utterly,  because,  as  a  matter 
of  fact,  and  despite  every  provocation,  no  considerable 
section  of  the  socialist  party  wavered  in  the  slightest 
from  its  determination  to  carry  on  its  work.  There  was 
a  moment  toward  the  end  of  '79  when  the  situation 
seemed  to  be  getting  out  of  hand,  and  a  secret  conference 
was  held  the  next  year  at  Wyden  in  Switzerland  to  de- 
termine the  policies  of  the  party.  In  the  report  pub- 
lished by  the  congress  no  names  were  given,  as  it  was,  of 
course,  necessary  to  maintain  complete  secrecy.  How- 
ever, it  seemed  clear  to  the  delegates  that,  if  they  re- 
sorted to  terrorist  methods,  they  would  be  destroyed  as 
the  Russians,  the  French,  the  Spanish,  and  the  Italians 
had  been  when  similar  conditions  confronted  them.  In 
view  of  the  present  state  of  their  organization,  violence, 
after  all,  could  be  merely  a  phrase,  as  they  were  not  fit- 
ted in  strength  or  in  numbers  to  combat  Bismarck.  One 
of  the  delegates  considered  that  Johann  Most  had  exer- 
cised an  evil  influence  on  many,  and  he  urged  that  all 
enlightened  German  socialists  turn  away  from  such  men. 
"Between  the  people  of  violence  and  the  true  revolution- 
ists there  will  always  be  dissension."  (29)  Another 
speaker  maintained  that  Most  could  be  no  more  consid- 
ered a  socialist.  He  is  at  best  a  Blanquist  and,  indeed, 
one  in  the  worst  sense  of  the  word,  who  had  no  other 
aim  than  to  pursue  the  bungling  work  of  a  revolution. 
It  is,  therefore,  necessary  that  the  congress  should  de- 
clare itself  decidedly  against  Most  and  should  expel  him 


220       VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

from  the  party.  (30)  The  word  "revolution"  has  been 
misunderstood,  and  the  socialist  members  of  the  Reich- 
stag have  been  reproved  because  they  are  not  revolution- 
ary. As  a  matter  of  fact,  every  socialist  is  a  revolution- 
ist, but  one  must  not  understand  by  revolution  the  ex- 
pression of  violence.  The  tactics  of  desperation,  as  the 
Nihilists  practice  them,  do  not  serve  the  purpose  of  Ger- 
many. (31)  As  a  result  of  the  Wyden  congress,  Most 
and  Hasselmann  were  ejected  from  the  party,  and  the 
tactics  of  Bebel  and  Liebknecht  were  adopted. 

After  1880  there  developed  an  underground  socialist 
movement  that  was  most  baffling  and  disconcerting  to  the 
police.  Socialist  papers,  printed  in  other  countries,  were 
being  circulated  by  the  thousands  in  all  parts  of  Ger- 
many. Funds  were  being  raised  in  some  mysterious 
manner  to  support  a  large  body  of  trusted  men  in  all 
parts  of  the  country  who  were  devoting  all  their  time 
to  secret  organization  and  to  the  carrying  on  of  propa- 
ganda. The  socialist  organizations,  which  had  been 
broken  up,  seemed  somehow  or  other  to  maintain  their 
relations.  And,  despite  all  that  could  be  done  by  the 
authorities,  socialist  agitation  seemed  to  be  going  on  even 
more  successfully  than  ever  before.  There  was  one  loop- 
hole which  Bismarck  had  not  been  able  to  close,  and  this 
of  course  was  developed  to  the  extreme  by  the  social- 
ists. Private  citizens  could  not  say  what  they  pleased, 
nor  was  it  allowed  to  newspapers  to  print  anything  on 
socialist  lines.  Nevertheless,  parliamentary  speeches 
were  privileged  matter,  and  they  could  be  sent  anywhere 
and  be  published  anywhere.  Bismarck  of  course  tried  to 
suppress  even  this  form  of  propaganda,  and  two  of  the 
deputies  were  arrested  on  the  ground  that  they  were  vio- 
lating the  new  law.  However,  the  Reichstag  could  not 
be  induced  to  sanction  this  interference  with  the  freedom 


THE  FIGHT  FOR  EXISTENCE  221 

of  deputies.  Bismarck  then  introduced  a  bill  into  the 
Reichstag  asking  for  power  to  punish  any  member  who 
abused  his  parliamentary  position.  There  was  to  be  a 
court  established  consisting  of  thirteen  deputies,  and  this 
was  to  have  power  to  punish  refractory  delegates  by  cen- 
suring them,  by  obliging  them  to  apologize  to  the  House, 
and  by  excluding  them  from  the  House.  It  was  also 
proposed  that  the  Reichstag  should  in  certain  instances 
prevent  the  publicity  of  its  proceedings.  This  bill  of  Bis- 
marck's aroused  immense  opposition.  It  was  called  "the 
Muzzle  Bill,"  and,  despite  all  his  efforts,  it  was  defeated. 
The  anti-socialist  law  had  been  passed  as  an  excep- 
tional measure,  and  it  was  fully  expected  that  at  the  end 
of  two  years  there  would  be  nothing  left  of  the  socialists 
in  Germany.  But,  when  the  moment  came  for  the  law 
to  expire,  Emperor  Alexander  II.  of  Russia  was  assassi- 
nated by  Nihilists.  The  German  Emperor  wrote  to  the 
Chancellor  urging  him  to  do  his  utmost  to  persuade  the 
governments  of  Europe  to  combine  against  the  forces  of 
anarchy  and  destruction.  Prince  Bismarck  immediately 
opened  up  negotiations  with  Russia,  Austria,  France, 
Switzerland,  and  England.  The  Russian  Government, 
being  asked  to  take  the  initiative,  invited  the  powers  to 
a  council  at  Brussels.  As  England  did  not  accept  the  in- 
vitation, France  and  Switzerland  also  declined.  Austria 
later  withdrew  her  acceptance,  with  the  result  that  Ger- 
many and  Russia  concluded  an  extradition  and  dynamite 
treaty  for  themselves,  while  on  March  31,  1881,  the  anti- 
socialist  law  was  reenacted  for  another  period.  In  1882 
the  Niederwald  plot  against  the  Imperial  family  was  dis- 
covered. Various  arrests  were  made,  an4  three  men 
avowedly  anarchists  were  sentenced  to  death  in  Decem- 
ber, 1884.  In  1885  a  high  police  official  at  Frankfort 
was  murdered,  and  an  anarchist  named  Lieske  was  ex- 


222       VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

ecuted  as  an  accomplice.  These  terrorist  acts  materially 
aided  Bismarck  in  his  warfare  on  the  social  democrats. 
Again  and  again  large  towns  were  put  in  a  minor  state 
of  siege,  with  the  military  practically  in  control.  Meet- 
ings were  dispersed,  suspected  papers  suppressed,  and  all 
tyranny  that  can  be  conceived  of  exercised  upon  all  those 
suspected  of  sympathy  with  the  socialists.  Yet  everyone 
had  to  admit  that  the  socialists  had  not  been  checked. 
Not  only  did  their  organization  still  exist,  but  it  was  all 
the  time  carrying  on  a  vigorous  agitation,  both  by  meet- 
ings and  by  the  circulation  of  literature.  Papers  printed 
abroad  were  being  smuggled  into  the  country  in  great 
quantities ;  socialist  literature  was  even  being  introduced 
into  the  garrisons  ;  and  there  seemed  to  be  no  dealing  with 
associations,  because  no  more  was  one  dissolved  than  two 
arose  to  take  its  place. 

Von  Puttkamer  himself  reported  to  the  Reichstag  in 
1882,  "It  is  undoubted  that  it  has  not  been  possible  by 
means  of  the  law  of  October,  1878,  to  wipe  social-democ- 
racy from  the  face  of  the  earth  or  even  to  shake  it  to 
the  center."  (32)  Indeed,  Liebknecht  was  bold  enough 
to  say  in  1884:  "You  have  not  succeeded  in  destroying 
our  organization,  and  I  am  convinced  that  you  will  never 
succeed.  I  believe,  indeed,  it  would  be  the  greatest  mis- 
fortune for  you  if  you  did  succeed.  The  anarchists,  who 
are  now  carrying  on  their  work  in  Austria,  have  no  foot- 
ing in  Germany — and  why?  Because  in  Germany  the 
mad  plans  of  those  men  are  wrecked  on  the  compact 
organization  of  social-democracy,  because  the  German 
proletariat,  in  view  of  the  fruitlessness  of  your  socialist 
law,  has  not  abandoned  hope  of  attaining  its  ends  peace- 
fully by  means  of  socialistic  propaganda  and  agitation. 
If — and  I  have  said  this  before — if  your  law  were  not 
pro  nihilo,  it  would  be  pro  nihilismo.     If  the  German 


THE  FIGHT  FOR  EXISTENCE  223 

proletariat  no  longer  believed  in  the  efficacy  of  our  pres- 
ent tactics;  if  we  found  that  we  could  no  longer  main- 
tain intact  the  organization  and  cohesion  of  the  party, 
what  would  happen?  We  should  simply  declare — we 
have  no  more  to  do  with  the  guidance  of  the  party;  we 
can  no  longer  be  responsible.  The  men  in  power  do  not 
wish  that  the  party  should  continue  to  exist ;  it  is  hoped 
to  destroy  us — well,  no  party  allows  itself  to  be  de- 
stroyed, for  there  is  above  all  things  the  law  of  self-de- 
fense, of  self-preservation,  and,  if  the  organized  direc- 
tion fails,  you  will  have  a  condition  of  anarchy,  in  which 
everything  is  left  to  the  individual.  And  do  you  really 
believe — you  who  have  so  often  praised  the  bravery  of 
the  Germans  up  to  the  heavens,  when  it  has  been  to  your 
interest  to  do  so — do  you  really  believe  that  the  hun- 
dreds of  thousands  of  German  social-democrats  are  cow- 
ards ?  Do  you  believe  that  what  has  happened  in  Russia 
would  not  be  possible  in  Germany  if  you  succeeded  in 
bringing  about  here  the  conditions  which  exist  there?" 
(33)  Both  Bebel  and  Liebknecht  taunted  the  Chancel- 
lor with  his  failure  to  drive  the  socialists  to  commit  acts 
of  violence.  "The  Government  may  be  sure,"  said  Lieb- 
knecht in  1886,  "that  we  shall  not,  now  or  ever,  go  upon 
the  bird-lime,  that  we  shall  never  be  such  fools  as  to  play 
the  game  of  our  enemies  by  attempts  .  .  .  the  more 
madly  you  carry  on,  the  sooner  you  will  come  to  the  end ; 
the  pitcher  goes  to  the  well  until  it  breaks."  (34) 

At  the  end  of  this  year  the  reports  given  from  the 
several  states  of  the  working  out  of  the  anti-socialist 
law  were  most  discouraging  to  the  Chancellor.  From 
everywhere  the  report  came  that  agitation  was  uninter- 
mittent,  and  being  carried  on  with  zeal  and  success.  And 
Bebel  said  publicly  that  nowhere  was  the  socialist  party 
more  numerous  or  better  organized  than  in  the  districts 


224       VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

where  the  minor  state  of  siege  had  been  proclaimed. 
The  year  1886  was  a  sensational  one.  Nine  of  the  so- 
cialists, including  Bebel,  Dietz,  Auer,  Von  Vollmar, 
Frohme — all  deputies — were  charged  with  taking  part  in 
a  secret  and  illegal  organization.  All  the  accused  were 
sentenced  to  imprisonment  for  six  or  nine  months,  Bebel 
and  his  parliamentary  associates  receiving  the  heavier 
penalty.  The  Reichstag  asked  for  reports  upon  the 
working  of  the  law.  Again  the  discouraging  news  came 
that  the  movement  seemed  to  be  growing  faster  than 
ever  before. 

The  crushing  by  repressive  measures  did  not,  however, 
exhaust  Bismarck's  plans  for  annihilating  the  socialists. 
At  the  same  time  he  outlined  an  extraordinary  program 
for  winning  the  support  of  the  working  classes.  Early  in 
the  eighties  he  proposed  his  great  scheme  of  social  legis- 
lation, intended  to  improve  radically  the  lot  of  the  toil- 
ers. Compulsory  insurance  against  accident,  illness,  in- 
validity, and  old  age  was  instituted  as  a  measure  for  giv- 
ing more  security  in  life  to  the  working  classes.  Insur- 
ance against  unemployment  was  also  proposed,  and  Bis- 
marck declared  that  the  State  should  guarantee  to  the 
toilers  the  right  to  work.  This  began  an  era  of  immense 
social  reforms  that  actually  wiped  out  some  of  the  worst 
slums  in  the  great  industrial  centers,  replaced  them  with 
large  and  beautiful  dwellings  for  the  working  classes,  and 
made  over  entire  cities.  The  discussions  in  the  Reich- 
stag now  seemed  to  be  largely  concerned  with  the  prob- 
lem of  the  working  classes  and  with  devising  plans  to 
obliterate  the  influence  of  the  socialists  over  the  workers 
and  to  induce  them  once  more  to  ally  themselves  to  the 
monarchy  and  to  the  Junkers. 

For  some  reason  wholly  mysterious  to  Bismarck,  all 
his  measures  against  the  socialists  failed.     Every  assault 


THE  FIGHT  FOR  EXISTENCE  225 

made  upon  them  seemed  to  increase  their  power,  while 
even  the  great  reforms  he  was  instituting  seemed  some- 
how to  be  credited  to  the  agitation  of  the  socialists.  In- 
stead of  proving  the  good  will  of  the  ruling  class,  these 
reforms  seemed  only  to  prove  its  weakness;  and  they 
were  looked  upon  generally  as  belated  efforts  to  remedy 
old  and  grievous  wrongs  which,  in  fact,  made  necessary 
the  protests  of  the  socialists.  The  result  was  that  tens 
of  thousands  of  workingmen  were  flocking  each  year  into 
the  camp  of  the  socialists,  and  at  each  election  the  social- 
ist votes  increased  in  a  most  dreadful  and  menacing  man- 
ner. When  the  anti-socialist  law  was  put  into  effect,  the 
party  polled  under  450,000  votes.  After  twelve  years  of 
underground  work  as  outlaws,  the  party  polled  1,427,000 
votes  Despite  all  the  efforts  of  Bismarck  and  all  the  im- 
mense power  of  the  Government,  socialism,  instead  of  be- 
ing crushed,  was  1,000,000  souls  stronger  after  twelve 
years  of  suffering  under  tyranny  than  it  was  in  the  be- 
ginning. This  of  course  would  not  do  at  all,  and  every- 
one saw  it  clearly  enough  except  the  Iron  Chancellor.  In- 
furiated by  his  own  failure  and  unwilling  to  confess  de- 
feat, he  pleaded  once  more,  in  1890,  for  the  reenactment 
of  the  anti-socialist  law  and,  indeed,  that  it  should  be 
made  a  permanent  part  of  the  penal  code  of  the  Empire. 
He  even  sought  further  powers  and  asked  the  Reichstag 
to  give  him  a  law  that  would  enable  him  to  expel  not  only 
from  districts  proclaimed  to  be  in  a  state  of  siege,  but 
from  Germany  altogether,  those  who  were  known  to 
hold  socialist  views.  The  Reichstag,  however,  refused 
to  grant  him  either  request,  and  on  September  30,  1890, 
just  twelve  years  after  its  birth,  the  anti-socialist  law 
was  repealed. 

That  night  was  a  glorious  one  for  the  socialists,  as 
wTell  as  a  very  dreadful  one   for  Bismarck  and  those 


226      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

others  who  had  made  prodigious  but  futile  efforts  to  de- 
stroy socialism.  Berlin  was  already  a  socialist  strong- 
hold, and  its  entire  people  that  night  came  into  the  streets 
to  sing  songs  of  thanksgiving.  Streets,  parks,  public 
places,  cafes,  theaters  were  filled  with  merrymakers,  re- 
joicing with  songs,  with  toasts  to  the  leading  socialists, 
and  with  boisterous  welcomes  to  the  exiles  who  were  re- 
turning. All  night  long  the  red  flag  waved,  and  the  Mar- 
seillaise was  sung,  as  all  that  passion  of  love,  enthusiasm, 
and  devotion  for  a  great  cause,  which,  for  twelve  long 
years,  had  been  brutally  suppressed,  burst  forth  in  floods 
of  joy.  "He  [Bismarck]  has  had  at  his  entire  disposal 
for  more  than  a  quarter  of  a  century,"  said  Liebknecht, 
"the  police,  the  army,  the  capital,  and  the  power  of  the 
State — in  brief,  all  the  means  of  mechanical  force.  We 
had  only  our  just  right,  our  firm  conviction,  our  bared 
breasts  to  oppose  him  with,  and  it  is  we  who  have  con- 
quered! Our  arms  were  the  best.  In  the  course  of  time 
brute  power  must  yield  to  the  moral  factors,  to  the  logic 
of  things.  Bismarck  lies  crushed  to  the  earth — and  so- 
cial democracy  is  the  strongest  party  in  Germany! 
.  .  .  The  essence  of  revolution  lies  not  in  the  means, 
but  in  the  end.  Violence  has  been,  for  thousands  of 
years,  a  reactionary  factor."  (35)  Certainly,  the  moral 
victory  was  immense.  There  had  been  a  twelve-years- 
long  torture  of  a  great  party,  in  which  every  man  who 
was  known  to  be  sympathetic  was  looked  upon  as  a  crim- 
inal and  an  outlaw.  Yet,  despite  every  effort  made  to 
drive  the  socialists  into  outrages,  they  never  wavered  the 
slightest  from  their  grim  determination  to  depend  solely 
upon  peaceable  methods.  It  is  indeed  marvelous  that  the 
German  socialists  should  have  stood  the  test  and  that, 
despite  the  most  barbarous  persecution,  they  should  have 
been  able  to  hold  their  forces  together,  to  restrain  their 


THE  FIGHT  FOR  EXISTENCE  227 

natural  anger,  and  to  keep  their  faith  in  the  ultimate  vic- 
tory of  peaceable,  legal,  and  political  methods.  Prome- 
theus, bound  to  his  rock  and  tortured  by  all  the  furies  of 
a  malignant  Jupiter,  did  not  rise  superior  to  his  tormen- 
tor with  more  grandeur  than  did  the  social  democracy  of 
Germany. 

Violence  does  indeed  seem  to  be  a  reactionary  force. 
The  use  of  it  by  the  anarchists  against  the  existing 
regime  seems  to  have  deprived  them  of  all  sympathy 
and  support.  More  and  more  they  became  isolated  from 
even  those  in  whose  name  they  claimed  to  be  fighting. 
So  the  violence  of  Bismarck,  intended  to  uproot  and 
destroy  the  deepest  convictions  of  a  great  body  of  work- 
ingmen,  deprived  him  and  his  circle  of  all  popular  sym- 
pathy and  support.  Year  by  year  he  became  weaker, 
and  the  futility  of  his  efforts  made  him  increasingly  bit- 
ter and  violent.  At  last  even  those  for  whom  he  had 
been  fighting  had  to  put  him  aside.  On  the  other  hand, 
those  he  fought  with  his  poisoned  weapons  became 
stronger  and  stronger,  their  spirit  grew  more  and  more 
buoyant,  their  confidence  in  success  more  and  more  cer- 
tain. And,  when  at  last  the  complete  victory  was  won, 
it  was  heralded  throughout  the  world,  and  from  thou- 
sands of  great  meetings,  held  in  nearly  every  civilized 
country,  there  came  to  the  German  social  democracy  tele- 
grams and  resolutions  of  congratulation.  The  mere  fact 
that  the  Germany  party  polled  a  million  and  a  half  votes 
was  in  itself  an  inspiration  to  the  workers  of  all  lands, 
and  in  the  elections  which  followed  in  France,  Italy,  Bel- 
gium, Denmark,  Sweden,  and  other  countries  the  social- 
ists vastly  increased  their  votes  and  more  firmly  estab- 
lished their  position  as  a  parliamentary  force.  In  1892 
France  polled  nearly  half  a  million  votes,  little  Belgium 
followed  with  three  hundred  and  twenty  thousand,  while 


228      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

in  Denmark  and  Switzerland  the  strength  of  the  social- 
ists was  quadrupled.  Instead  of  a  mere  handful  of  the- 
orists, the  socialists  were  now  numbered  by  the  million. 
Their  movement  was  world-wide,  and  the  program  of 
every  political  party  in  the  various  countries  was  based 
upon  the  principles  laid  down  by  Marx.  The  doctrines 
which  he  had  advocated  from  '47  to  '64,  and  fought  des- 
perately to  retain  throughout  all  the  struggles  with  Ba- 
kounin,  were  now  the  foundation  principles  of  the  move- 
ment in  Germany,  France,  Italy,  Austria,  Switzerland, 
Belgium,  Holland,  Denmark,  Norway,  Sweden,  Britain, 
and  even  in  other  countries  east  and  west  of  Europe. 


CHAPTER   X 

THE   NEWEST   ANARCHISM 

At  the  beginning  of  the  nineties  the  socialists  were 
jubilant.  Their  great  victory  in  Germany  and  the  enor- 
mous growth  of  the  movement  in  all  countries  assured 
them  that  the  foundations  had  at  last  been  laid  for  the 
great  world-wide  movement  that  they  had  so  long 
dreamed  of.  Internal  struggles  had  largely  disappeared, 
and  the  mighty  energies  of  the  movement  were  being 
turned  to  the  work  of  education  and  of  organization. 
Great  international  socialist  congresses  were  now  the 
natural  outgrowth  of  powerful  and  extensive  national 
movements.  Yet,  almost  at  this  very  moment  there  was 
forming  in  the  Latin  countries  a  new  group  of  dissi- 
dents who  were  endeavoring  to  resurrect  what  Bakounin 
called  in  1871  French  socialism,  and  what  our  old  friend 
Guillaume  recognized  to  be  a  revival  of  the  principles 
and  methods  of  the  anarchist  International.*  And,  in- 
deed, in  1895,  what  may  perhaps  be  best  described  as  the 
renascence  of  anarchism  appeared  in  France  under  an 
old  and  influential  name.  Up  to  that  time  syndicalism 
signified  nothing  more  than  trade  unionism,  and  the 
French  sxndicats  were  merely  associations  of  workmen 
struggling  to  obtain  higher  wages  and  shorter  hours  of 
labor.     But  in  1895  the  term  began  to  have  a  different 

*  His  words  are :  "What  is  the  General  Confederation  of 
Labor,  if  not  the  continuation  of  the  International?"  Documents 
et  Souvenirs,  Vol.  IV,  p.  vii. 

229 


23o      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

meaning,  and  almost  immediately  it  made  the  tour  of  the 
world  as  a  unique  and  dreadful  revolutionary  philosophy. 
It  became  a  new  "red  specter,"  with  a  menacing  and 
subversive  program,  that  created  a  veritable  furore  of 
discussion  in  the  newspapers  and  magazines  of  all  coun- 
tries. Rarely  has  a  movement  aroused  such  universal 
agitation,  awakened  such  world-wide  discussions,  and 
called  forth  such  expressions  of  alarm  as  this  one,  that 
seemed  suddenly  to  spring  from  the  depths  of  the  under- 
world, full-armed  and  ready  for  battle.  Everywhere 
syndicalism  was  heralded  as  an  entirely  new  philosophy. 
Nothing  like  it  had  ever  been  known  before  in  the  world. 
Multitudes  rushed  to  greet  it  as  a  kind  of  new  revela- 
tion, while  other  multitudes  instinctively  looked  upon  it 
with  suspicion  as  something  that  promised  once  more  to 
introduce  dissension  into  the  world  of  labor. 

What  is  syndicalism  ?  Whence  came  it  and  why  ?  The 
first  question  has  been  answered  in  a  hundred  books 
written  in  the  last  ten  years.  In  all  languages  the  mean- 
ing of  this  new  philosophy  of  industrial  warfare  has  been 
made  clear.  There  is  hardly  a  country  in  the  world  that 
has  not  printed  several  books  on  this  new  movement, 
and,  although  the  word  itself  cannot  be  found  in  our 
dictionaries,  hardly  anyone  who  reads  can  have  escaped 
gaining  some  acquaintance  with  its  purport.  The  other 
question,  however,  has  concerned  few,  and  almost  no  one 
has  traced  the  origin  of  syndicalism  to  that  militant  group 
of  anarchists  whom  the  French  Government  had  endeav- 
ored to  annihilate.  After  the  series  of  tragedies  which 
ended  with  the  murder  of  Carnot,  the  French  police 
hunted  the  anarchists  from  pillar  to  post.  Their  groups 
were  broken  up,  their  papers  suppressed,  and  their  lead- 
ers kept  constantly  under  the  surveillance  of  police 
agents.      Every    man    with    anarchist    sympathies    was 


THE  NEWEST  ANARCHISM  231 

hounded  as  an  outlaw,  and  in  1894  they  were  broken, 
scattered,  and  isolated.  Scorning  all  relations  with  the 
political  groups  and  indeed  excluded  from  them,  as  from 
other  sections  of  the  labor  movement,  by  their  own  tac- 
tics, they  found  themselves  almost  alone,  without  the  op- 
portunity even  of  propagating  their  views.  Facing  a 
blank  wall,  they  began  then  to  discuss  the  necessity  of 
radically  changing  their  tactics,  and  in  that  year  one  of 
the  most  militant  of  them,  Emile  Pouget,  who  had  been 
arrested  several  times  for  provoking  riots,  undertook  to 
persuade  his  associates  to  enter  actively  into  the  trade 
unions.  In  his  peculiar  argot  he  wrote  in  Pcre  Peinard: 
"If  there  is  a  group  into  which  the  anarchists  should 
thrust  themselves,  it  is  evidently  the  trade  union.  The 
coarse  vegetables  would  make  an  awful  howl  if  the  an- 
archists, whom  they  imagine  they  have  gagged,  should 
profit  by  the  circumstance  to  infiltrate  themselves  in 
droves  into  the  trade  unions  and  spread  their  ideas  there 
without  any  noise  or  blaring  of  trumpets."  (1)  This 
plea  had  its  effect,  and  more  and  more  anarchists  began 
to  join  the  trade  unions,  while  their  friends,  already  in 
the  unions,  prepared  the  way  for  their  coming.  Pellou- 
tier,  a  zealous  and  efficient  administrator,  had  already 
become  the  dominant  spirit  in  one  entire  section  of  the 
French  labor  movement,  that  of  the  Bourses  du  Travail. 
In  another  section,  the  carpenter  Tortellier,  a  roving  agi- 
tator and  militant  anarchist,  had  already  persuaded  a 
large  number  of  unions  to  declare  for  the  general  strike 
as  the  sole  effective  weapon  for  revolutionary  purposes. 
Moreover,  Guerard,  Griffuelhes,  and  other  opponents  of 
political  action  were  preparing  the  ground  in  the  unions 
for  an  open  break  with  the  socialists.  By  1896  the 
strength  of  the  anarchists  in  the  trade  unions  was  so 
great  that  the  French  delegates  to  the  international  so- 


2$2 


VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 


cialist  congress  at  London  were  divided  into  two  sections : 
one  in  sympathy  with  the  views  of  the  anarchists,  the 
other  hostile  to  them.  Such  notable  anarchists  as  Tortel- 
lier,  Malatesta,  Grave,  Pouget,  Pelloutier,  Delesalle, 
Hamon,  and  Guerard  were  sent  to  London  as  the  repre- 
sentatives of  the  French  trade  unions.  Although  the 
anarchists  had  been  repeatedly  expelled  from  socialist 
congresses,  and  the  rules  prohibited  their  admittance, 
these  men  could  not  be  denied  a  hearing  so  long  as  they 
came  as  the  representatives  of  bona  fide  trade  unions.  As 
a  result,  the  anarchists,  speaking  as  trade  unionists, 
fought  throughout  the  congress  against  political  action. 
A  typical  declaration  was  that  of  Tortellier,  when  he 
said :  "If  only  those  in  favor  of  political  action  are  ad- 
mitted to  congresses,  the  Latin  races  will  abandon  the 
congresses.  The  Italians  are  drifting  away  from  the 
idea  of  political  action.  Properly  organized,  the  workers 
can  settle  their  affairs  without  any  intervention  on  the 
part  of  the  legislature."  (2)  Guerard,  of  the  railway 
workers,  holding  much  the  same  views,  urged  the  con- 
gress to  adopt  the  general  strike,  on  the  ground  that  it  is 
"the  most  revolutionary  weapon  we  have."  (3)  Despite 
their  threats  and  demands,  the  anarchists  were  com- 
pletely ignored,  although  they  were  numerous  in  the 
French,  Italian,  Spanish,  and  Dutch  delegations.  At  last 
it  became  clear  to  the  anarchists  that  the  international 
socialist  congresses  would  not  admit  them,  if  it  were 
possible  to  keep  them  out,  nor  longer  discuss  with 
them  the  wisdom  of  political  action.  Consequently, 
the  anarchists  left  London,  clear  at  last  on  this  one  point, 
that  the  socialists  were  firmly  determined  to  have  no  fur- 
ther dealings  with  them.  The  same  decision  had  been 
made  at  The  Hague  in  1872,  again  in  1889  at  the  interna- 


THE  NEWEST  ANARCHISM  233 

tional  congress  at  Paris,  then  in  1891  at  Brussels,  again 
in  1893  at  Zurich,  and  finally  at  London  in  1896. 

The  anarchists  that  returned  to  Paris  from  the  Lon- 
don congress  were  not  slow  in  taking  their  revenge. 
They  had  already  threatened  in  London  to  take  the  work- 
ers of  the  Latin  countries  out  of  the  socialist  movement, 
but  no  one  apparently  had  given  much  heed  to  their  re- 
marks. In  reality,  however,  they  were  in  a  position  to 
carry  out  their  threats,  and  the  insults  which  they  felt 
they  had  just  suffered  at  the  hands  of  the  socialists 
made  them  more  determined  than  ever  to  induce  the 
unions  to  declare  war  on  the  socialist  parties  of  France, 
Italy,  Spain,  and  Holland.  Plans  were  also  laid  for  the 
building  up  of  a  trade-union  International  based  largely 
on  the  principles  and  tactics  of  what  they  now  called 
"revolutionary  syndicalism." 

The  year  before  (1895)  the  General  Confederation  of 
Labor  had  been  launched  at  Limoges.  Except  for  its 
declaration  in  favor  of  the  general  strike  as  a  revolu- 
tionary weapon,  the  congress  developed  no  new  syndi- 
calist doctrines.  It  was  at  Tours,  in  1896,  that  the 
French  unions,  dominated  by  the  anarchists,  declared 
they  would  no  longer  concern  themselves  with  reforms ; 
they  would  abandon  childish  efforts  at  amelioration ;  and 
instead  they  would  constitute  themselves  into  a  con- 
scious fighting  minority  that  was  to  lead  the  working 
class  with  no  further  delay  into  open  rebellion.  In  their 
opinion,  it  was  time  to  begin  the  bitter,  implacable  fight 
that  was  not  to  end  until  the  working  class  had  freed  it- 
self from  wage  slavery.  The  State  was  not  worth  con- 
quering, parliaments  were  inherently  corrupt,  and,  there- 
fore, political  action  was  futile.  Other  means,  more 
direct  and  revolutionary,  must  be  employed  to  destroy 
capitalism.     As   the  very  existence  of  society  depends 


234      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

upon  the  services  of  labor,  what  could  be  more  simple 
than  for  labor  to  cease  to  serve  society  until  its  rights 
are  assured?  Thus  argued  the  French  trade  unionists, 
and  the  strike  was  adopted  as  the  supreme  war  measure. 
Partial  strikes  were  to  broaden  into  industrial  strikes, 
and  industrial  strikes  into  general  strikes.  The  struggle 
between  the  classes  was  to  take  the  form  of  two  hostile 
camps,  firmly  resolved  upon  a  war  that  would  finish  only 
when  the  one  or  the  other  of  the  antagonists  had  been 
utterly  crushed.  When  John  Brown  marched  with  his 
little  band  to  attack  the  slave-owning  aristocracy  of  the 
South,  he  became  the  forerunner  of  our  terrible  Civil 
War.  It  was  the  same  spirit  that  moved  the  French 
trade  unionists.  Although  pitiably  weak  in  numbers  and 
poor  in  funds,  they  decided  to  stop  all  parleyings  with 
the  enemy  and  to  fire  the  first  gun. 

The  socialist  congress  in  London  was  held  in  July, 
and  the  French  trade-union  congress  at  Tours  was  held 
in  September  of  the  same  year.  The  anarchists  were  out 
in  their  full  strength,  prepared  to  make  reprisals  on  the 
socialists.  It  was  after  declaring :  "The  conquest  of  po- 
litical power  is  a  chimera,"  (4)  that  Guerard  launched 
forth  in  his  fiery  argument  for  the  revolutionary  general 
strike:  "The  partial  strikes  fail  because  the  working- 
men  become  demoralized  and  succumb  under  the  intimi- 
dation of  the  employers,  protected  by  the  government. 
The  general  strike  will  last  a  short  while,  and  its  repres- 
sion will  be  impossible ;  as  to  intimidation,  it  is  still  less 
to  be  feared.  The  necessity  of  defending  the  factories, 
workshops,  manufactories,  stores,  etc.,  will  scatter  and 
disperse  the  army.  .  .  .  And  then,  in  the  fear  that 
the  strikers  may  damage  the  railways,  the  signals,  the 
works  of  art,  the  government  will  be  obliged  to  protect 
the  39,000  kilometers  of  railroad  lines  by  drawing  up  the 


THE  NEWEST  ANARCHISM  235 

troops  all  along  them.  The  300,000  men  of  the  active 
army,  charged  with  the  surveillance  of  39  million  meters, 
will  be  isolated  from  one  another  by  130  meters,  and  this 
can  be  done  only  on  the  condition  of  abandoning  the  pro- 
tection of  the  depots,  of  the  stations,  of  the  factories, 
etc.  .  .  .  and  of  abandoning  the  employers  to  them- 
selves, thus  leaving  the  field  free  in  the  large  cities  to  the 
rebellious  workingmen.  The  principal  force  of  the  gen- 
eral strike  consists  in  its  power  of  imposing  itself.  A 
strike  in  one  branch  of  industry  must  involve  other 
branches.  The  general  strike  cannot  be  decreed  in  ad- 
vance; it  will  burst  forth  suddenly;  a  strike  of  the  rail- 
way men,  for  instance,  if  declared,  will  be  the  signal  for 
the  general  strike.  It  will  be  the  duty  of  militant  work- 
ingmen, when  this  signal  is  given,  to  make  their  com- 
rades in  the  trade  unions  leave  their  work.  Those  who 
continue  to  work  on  that  day  will  be  compelled,  or  forced, 
to  quit.  .  .  .  The  general  strike  will  be  the  Revolu- 
tion, peaceful  or  not."  (5) 

Here  is  a  new  program  of  action,  several  points  of 
which  are  worthy  of  attention.  It  is  clear  that  the  gen- 
eral strike  is  here  conceived  of  as  a  panacea,  an  unfailing 
weapon  that  obviates  the  necessity  of  political  parties, 
parliamentary  work,  or  any  action  tending  toward  the 
capture  of  political  power.  It  is  granted  that  it  must 
end  in  civil  war,  but  it  is  thought  that  this  war  cannot 
fail ;  it  must  result  in  a  complete  social  revolution.  Even 
more  significant  is  the  thought  that  it  will  burst  forth 
suddenly,  without  requiring  any  preliminary  education, 
extensive  preparations,  or  even  widespread  organization. 
In  one  line  it  is  proposed  as  an  automatic  revolution ;  in 
another  it  is  said  that  the  militant  workingmen  are  ex- 
pected to  force  the  others  to  quit  work.  Out  of  11,000,- 
000  toilers  in  France,  about  1,000,000  are  organized.  Out 


236      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

of  this  million,  about  400,000  belong  to  the  Confedera- 
tion, and,  out  of  this  number,  it  is  doubtful  if  half  are 
in  favor  of  a  general  strike.  The  proposition  of  Guer- 
ard  then  presents  itself  as  follows:  that  a  minority  of 
organized  men  shall  force  not  only  the  vast  majority 
of  their  fellow  unionists  but  twenty  times  their  number 
of  unorganized  men  to  quit  work  in  order  to  launch  the 
war  for  emancipation.  Under  the  compulsion  of  200,000 
men,  a  nation  of  40,000,000  is  to  be  forced  immediately, 
without  palaver  or  delay,  to  revolutionize  society. 

The  next  year,  at  Toulouse,  the  French  unions  again 
assembled,  and  here  it  was  that  Pouget  and  Delesalle, 
both  anarchists,  presented  the  report  which  outlined  still 
another  war  measure,  that  of  sabotage.  The  newly  ar- 
rived was  there  baptized,  and  received  by  all,  says  Pou- 
get, with  warm  enthusiasm.  This  sabotage  was  hardly 
born  before  it,  too,  made  a  tour  of  the  world,  creating 
everywhere  the  same  furore  of  discussion  that  had  been 
aroused  by  syndicalism.  It  presents  itself  in  such  a  mul- 
titude of  forms  that  it  almost  evades  definition.  If  a 
worker  is  badly  paid  and  returns  bad  work  for  bad  pay, 
he  is  a  saboteur.  If  a  strike  is  lost,  and  the  workmen 
return  only  to  break  the  machines,  spoil  the  products, 
and  generally  disorganize  a  factory,  they  are  saboteurs. 
The  idea  of  sabotage  is  that  any  dissatisfied  workman 
shall  undertake  to  break  the  machine  or  spoil  the  product 
of  the  machines  in  order  to  render  the  conduct  of  in- 
dustry unprofitable,  if  not  actually  impossible.  It  may 
range  all  the  way  from  machine  obstruction  or  destruc- 
tion to  dynamiting,  train  wrecking,  and  arson.  It  may 
be  some  petty  form  of  malice,  or  it  may  extend  to  every 
act  advocated  by  our  old  friends,  the  terrorists. 

The  work  of  one  other  congress  must  be  mentioned. 
At  Lyons  (1901)  it  was  decided  that  an  inquiry  should 


THE  NEWEST  ANARCHISM  237 

be  sent  out  to  all  the  affiliated  unions  to  find  out  exactly 
how  the  proposed  great  social  revolution  was  to  be  car- 
ried out.  For  several  years  the  Confederation  had 
sought  to  launch  a  revolutionary  general  strike,  but  so 
many  of  the  rank  and  file  were  asking,  "What  would  we 
do,  even  if  the  general  strike  were  successful?"  that  it 
occurred  to  the  leaders  it  might  be  well  to  find  out.  As 
a  result,  they  sent  out  the  following  list  of  questions : 
"(1)  How  would  your  union  act  in  order  to  transform 
itself  from  a  group  for  combat  into  a  group  for  produc- 
tion? 

"(2)  How  would  you  act  in  order  to  take  possession 
of  the  machinery  pertaining  to  your  industry? 

"(3)  How  do  yon  conceive  the  functions  of  the  or- 
ganized shops  and  factories  in  the  future? 

"(4)  If  your  union  is  a  group  within  the  system  of 
highways,  of  transportation  of  products  or  of  passengers, 
of  distribution,  etc.,  how  do  you  conceive  of  its  func- 
tioning ? 

"(5)  What  will  be  your  relations  to  your  federation  of 
trade  or  of  industry  after  your  reorganization? 

"(6)  On  what  principle  would  the  distribution  of 
products  take  place,  and  how  would  the  productive 
groups  procure  the  raw  material  for  themselves  ? 

"(7)  What  part  would  the  Bourses  du  Travail  play 
in  the  transformed  society,  and  what  would  be  their  task 
with  reference  to  the  statistics  and  to  the  distribution  of 
products?"  (6) 

The  report  dealing  with  the  results  of  this  inquiry  con- 
tains such  a  variety  of  views  that  it  is  not  easy  to  sum- 
marize it.  It  seems,  however,  to  have  been  more  or  less 
agreed  that  each  group  of  producers  was  to  control  the 
industry  in  which  it  was  engaged.  The  peasants  were  to 
take  the  land.    The  miners  were  to  take  the  mines.    The 


238      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

railway  workers  were  to  take  the  railroads.  Every  trade 
union  was  to  obtain  possession  of  the  tools  of  its  trade, 
and  the  new  society  was  to  be  organized  on  the  basis 
of  a  trade-union  ownership  of  industry.  In  the  villages, 
towns,  and  cities  the  various  trades  were  then  to  be  or- 
ganized into  a  federation  whose  duty  would  be  to  ad- 
minister all  matters  of  joint  interest  in  their  localities. 
The  local  federations  were  then  to  be  united  into  a  Gen- 
eral Confederation,  to  whose  administration  were  to  be 
left  only  those  public  services  which  were  of  national  im- 
portance. The  General  Confederation  was  also  to  serve 
as  an  intermediary  between  the  various  trades  and  locals 
and  as  an  agency  for  representing  the  interests  of  all  the 
unions  in  international  relations. 

This  is  in  brief  the  meaning  of  syndicalism.  It  differs 
from  socialism  in  both  aim  and  methods.  The  aim  of 
the  latter  is  the  control  by  the  community  of  the  means 
of  production.  The  aim  of  syndicalism  is  the  control 
by  autonomous  trade  unions  of  that  production  carried 
on  by  those  trades.  It  does  not  seek  to  refashion  the 
State  or  to  aid  in  its  evolution  toward  social  democracy. 
It  will  have  nothing  to  do  with  political  action  or  with 
any  attempt  to  improve  the  machinery  of  democracy. 
The  masses  must  arise,  take  possession  of  the  mines, 
factories,  railroads,  fields,  and  all  industrial  processes 
and  natural  resources,  and  then,  through  trade  unions  or 
industrial  unions,  administer  the  new  economic  system. 
Furthermore,  the  syndicalists  differ  from  the  socialists 
in  their  conception  of  the  class  struggle.  To  the  social- 
ist the  capitalist  is  as  much  the  product  of  our  economic 
system  as  the  worker.  No  socialist  believes  that  the 
capitalist  is  individually  to  blame  for  our  economic  ills. 
The  syndicalist  dissents  from  this  view.  To  him  the 
capitalist  is  an  individual  enemy.     He  must  be  fought 


THE  NEWEST  ANARCHISM 


239 


and  destroyed.  There  is  no  form  of  mediation  or  con- 
ciliation possible  between  the  worker  and  his  employer. 
Conditions  must,  therefore,  be  made  intolerable  for  the 
capitalist.  Work  must  be  done  badly.  Machines  must 
be  destroyed.  Industrial  processes  must  be  subjected  to 
chaos.  Every  worker  must  be  inspired  with  the  one  end 
and  aim  of  destruction.  Without  the  cooperation  of  the 
worker,  capitalist  production  must  break  down.  There- 
fore, the  revolutionary  syndicalist  will  fight,  if  possible, 
openly  through  his  union,  or,  if  that  is  impossible,  by 
stealth,  as  an  individual,  to  ruin  his  employer.  The  world 
of  to-day  is  to  be  turned  into  incessant  civil  war  between 
capital  and  labor.  Not  only  the  two  classes,  but  the  indi- 
viduals of  the  two  classes,  must  be  constantly  engaged 
in  a  deadly  conflict.  There  is  to  be  no  truce  until  the 
fight  is  ended.  The  loyal  workman  is  to  be  considered  a 
traitor.  The  union  that  makes  contracts  or  participates 
in  collective  bargaining  is  to  be  ostracized.  And  even 
those  who  are  disinclined  to  battle  will  be  forced  into 
the  ranks  by  compulsion.  "Those  who  continue  to  work 
will  be  compelled  to  quit,"  says  Guerard.  The  strike  is 
not  to  be  merely  a  peaceable  abstention  from  work.  The 
very  machines  are  to  be  made  to  strike  by  being  ren- 
dered incapable  of  production.  These  are  the  methods 
of  the  militant  revolutionary  syndicalists.* 

Toward  the  end  of  the  nineties  another  element  came 
to  the  aid  of  the  anarchists.  It  is  difficult  to  class  this 
group  with  any  certainty.    They  are  neither  socialists  nor 

*  In  justice  to  the  French  unions  it  must  be  said  that  a  large 
number,  probably  a  considerable  majority,  do  not  share  these 
views.  The  views  of  the  latter  are  almost  identical  with  those 
of  the  American  and  English  unions ;  but  at  present  the  new 
anarchists  are  in  the  saddle,  although  their  power  appears  to  be 
waning. 


240 


VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 


anarchists.  They  remind  one  of  those  Bakotminists  that 
Marx  once  referred  to  as  "lawyers  without  cases,  physi- 
cians without  patients  and  knowledge,  students  of  bil- 
liards, etc."  (7)  "They  are  good-natured,  gentlemanly, 
cultured  people,"  says  Sombart ;  "people  with  spotless 
linen,  good  manners  and  fashionably  dressed  wives ;  peo- 
ple with  whom  one  holds  social  intercourse  as  with  one's 
equals;  people  who  would  at  first  sight  hardly  be  taken 
as  the  representatives  of  a  new  movement  whose  object 
it  is  to  prevent  socialism  from  becoming  a  mere  middle- 
class  belief."  (8)  In  a  word,  they  appear  to  be  indi- 
viduals wearied  with  the  unrealities  of  life  and  seeking 
to  overcome  their  ennui  by,  at  any  rate,  discussing  the 
making  of  revolutions.  With  their  "myths,"  their  "re- 
flections on  violence,"  their  appeals  to  physical  vigor  and 
to  the  glory  of  combat,  as  well  as  with  their  incessant 
attacks  on  the  socialist  movement,  they  have  given  very 
material  aid  to  the  anarchist  element  in  the  syndicalist 
movement.  For  a  number  of  years  I  have  read  faith- 
fully Le  Mouvement  Socialiste,  but  I  confess  that  I  have 
not  understood  their  dazzling  metaphysics,  and  I  am 
somewhat  comforted  to  see  that  both  Levine  (9)  and 
Lewis  (10)  find  them  frequently  incomprehensible. 

Without  injustice  to  this  group  of  intellectuals,  I  think 
it  may  be  truthfully  said  that  they  have  contributed  noth- 
ing essential  to  the  doctrines  of  syndicalism  as  developed 
by  the  trades  unionists  themselves ;  and  Edward  Berth, 
in  Les  Nouveaux  Aspects  du  Socialisme,  has  partially  ex- 
plained why,  without  meaning  to  do  so.  "It  has  often 
been  observed,"  he  says,  "that  the  anarchists  are  by 
origin  artisan,  peasant,  or  aristocrat.  Rousseau  repre- 
sents, obviously,  the  anarchism  of  the  artisan.  His  re- 
public is  a  little  republic  of  free  and  independent  crafts- 
men. .  .  .  Proudhon  is  a  peasant  in  his  heart  .  .  .  and, 


THE  NEWEST  ANARCHISM  241 

if  we  finally  take  Tolstoi,  we  find  here  an  anarchism  of 
worldly  or  aristocratic  origin.  Tolstoi  is  a  blase  aristo- 
crat, disgusted  with  civilization  by  having  too  much  eaten 
of  it."  (11)  Whether  or  not  this  characterization  of  Tol- 
stoi is  justified,  there  can  be  no  question  that  many  of  this 
type  rushed  to  the  aid  of  syndicalism.  Its  savage  vigor 
appeals  to  some  artists,  decadents,  and  dcclasscs.  Neuro- 
tic as  a  rule,  they  seem  to  hunger  for  the  stimulus  which 
comes  by  association  with  the  merely  physical  power  and 
vigor  of  the  working  class.  The  navvy,  the  coalheaver, 
or  "yon  rower  .  .  .  the  muscles  all  a-ripple  on  his  back," 
(12)  awakens  in  them  a  worshipful  admiration,  even  as  it 
did  in  the  effete  Cleon.  Such  a  theory  as  syndicalism, 
declares  Sombart,  "could  only  have  grown  up  in  a  coun- 
try possessing  so  high  a  culture  as  France ;  that  it  could 
have  been  thought  out  only  by  minds  of  the  nicest  per- 
ception, by  people  who  have  become  quite  blase,  whose 
feelings  require  a  very  strong  stimulus  before  they  can 
be  stirred;  people  who  have  something  of  the  artistic 
temperament,  and,  consequently,  look  disdainfully  on 
what  has  been  called  'Philistinism' — on  business,  on  mid- 
dle-class ideals,  and  so  forth.  They  are,  as  it  were,  the 
fine  silk  as  contrasted  with  the  plain  wool  of  ordinary 
people.  They  detest  the  common,  everyday  round  as 
much  as  they  hate  what  is  natural ;  they  might  be  called 
'Social  Sybarites.'  Such  are  the  people  who  have  created 
the  syndicalist  system."  (13)  On  one  point  Sombart  is 
wrong.  All  the  essential  doctrines  of  revolutionary  syn- 
dicalism, as  a  matter  of  fact,  originated  with  the  an- 
archists in  the  unions,  and  the  most  that  can  be  said  for 
the  "Sybarites"  is  that  they  elaborated  and  mystified 
these  doctrines. 

There  are  those,  of  course,  who  maintain  that  syndical- 
ism is  wholly  a  natural  and  inevitable  product  of  ceo- 


242      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

nomic  forces,  and,  so  far  as  the  actual  syndicalist  move- 
ment is  concerned,  that  is  unquestionably  true.  But  in  all 
the  maze  of  philosophy  and  doctrine  that  has  been  thrown 
about  the  actual  French  movement,  we  find  the  traces  of 
two  extraneous  forces — the  anarchists  who  availed  them- 
selves of  the  opportunity  that  an  awakening  trade  union- 
ism gave  them,  and  those  intellectuals  of  leisure,  culture, 
and  refinement  who  found  the  methods  of  political  social- 
ism too  tame  to  satisfy  their  violent  revolt  against  things 
bourgeois.  And  the  philosophical  syndicalism  that  was 
born  of  this  union  combines  utopianism  and  anarchism. 
The  yearning  esthetes  found  satisfaction  in  the  rugged 
energy  and  physical  daring  of  the  men  of  action,  while 
the  latter  were  astonished  and  flattered  to  find  their 
simple  war  measures  adorned  with  metaphysical  abstrac- 
tions and  arousing  an  immense  furore  among  the  most 
learned  and  fashionable  circles  of  Europe. 

However,  something  in  addition  to  personality  is 
needed  to  explain  the  rise  of  syndicalist  socialism  in 
France.  Like  anarchism,  syndicalism  is  a  natural  prod- 
uct of  certain  French  and  Italian  conditions.  It  is  not 
strange  that  the  Latin  peoples  have  in  the  past  harbored 
the  ideas  of  anarchism,  or  that  now  they  harbor  the  ideas 
of  syndicalism.  The  enormous  proportion  of  small  prop- 
erty owners  in  the  French  nation  is  the  economic  basis 
for  a  powerful  individualism.  Anything  which  interferes 
with  the  liberty  of  the  individual  is  abhorred,  and  noth- 
ing awakens  a  more  lively  hatred  than  centralization  and 
State  power.  The  vast  extent  of  small  industry,  with 
the  apprentice,  journeyman,  and  master-workman,  has 
wielded  an  influence  over  the  mentality  of  the  French 
workers.  Berth,  for  instance,  follows  Proudhon  in  con- 
ceiving of  the  future  commonwealth  as  a  federation  of 
innumerable  little  workshops.     Gigantic  industries,  such 


THE  NEWEST  ANARCHISM  243 

as  are  known  in  Germany,  England,  and  America,  seem 
to  be  problems  quite  foreign  to  the  mind  of  the  typical 
Latin  worker.  He  believes  that,  if  he  can  be  left  alone 
in  his  little  industry,  and  freed  from  exploitation,  he, 
like  the  peasant,  will  be  supreme,  possessing  both  liberty 
and  abundance.  He  will,  therefore,  tolerate  willingly 
neither  the  interference  of  a  centralized  State  nor  favor 
a  centralized  syndicalism.  Industry  must  be  given  into 
the  hands  of  the  workers,  and,  when  he  speaks  of  indus- 
try, he  has  in  mind  workshops,  which,  in  the  socialism  of 
the  Germans,  the  English,  and  the  Americans,  might  be 
left  for  a  long  time  to  come  in  private  hands. 

In  harmony  with  the  above  facts,  we  find  that  the 
strongest  centers  of  syndicalism  in  France,  Italy,  and 
Spain  are  in  those  districts  where  the  factory  system  is 
very  backward.  Where  syndicalism  and  anarchism  pre- 
vail most  strongly,  we  find  conditions  of  economic  im- 
maturity which  strikingly  resemble  those  of  England  in 
the  time  of  Owen.  In  all  these  districts  trade  unionism  is 
undeveloped.  When  it  exists  at  all,  it  is  more  a  feeling 
out  for  solidarity  than  the  actual  existence  of  solidarity. 
It  is  the  first  groping  toward  unity  that  so  often  brings 
riots  and  violence,  because  organization  is  absent  and 
the  feeling  of  power  does  not  exist.  Carl  Legien,  the 
leader  of  the  great  German  unions,  said  at  the  interna- 
tional socialist  congress  at  Stuttgart  (1907)  :  "As  soon 
as  the  French  have  an  actual  trade-union  organization, 
they  will  cease  discussing  blindly  the  general  strike,  di- 
rect action,  and  sabotage."  (14)  Vliegen,  the  Dutch 
leader,  went  even  further  when  he  declared  at  the  previ- 
ous congress,  at  Amsterdam  (1904),  that  it  is  not  the 
representatives  of  the  strong  organizations  of  England, 
Germany,  and  Denmark  who  wish  the  general  strike ;  it  is 
the    representatives    of    France,    Russia,    and    Holland. 


244      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

where  the  trade-union  organization  is  feeble  or  does  not 
exist.  (15) 

Still  another  factor  forces  the  French  trade  unions 
to  rely  upon  violence,  and  that  is  their  poverty.  The 
trade-unionists  in  the  Latin  countries  dislike  to  pay 
dues,  and  the  whole  organized  labor  movement  as  a  re- 
sult lives  constantly  from  hand  to  mouth.  "The  funda- 
mental condition  which  determines  the  policy  of  direct 
action,"  says  Dr.  Louis  Levine  in  his  excellent  mono- 
graph on  "The  Labor  Movement  in  France,"  "is  the  pov- 
erty of  French  syndicalism.  Except  for  the  Federation 
du  Livre,  only  a  very  few  federations  pay  a  more  or  less 
regular  strike  benefit ;  the  rest  have  barely  means  enough 
to  provide  for  their  administrative  and  organizing  ex- 
penses and  cannot  collect  any  strike  funds  worth  mention- 
ing. .  .  .  The  French  workingmen,  therefore,  are  forced 
to  fall  back  on  other  means  during  strikes.  Quick  action, 
intimidation,  sabotage,  are  then  suggested  to  them  by 
their  very  situation  and  by  their  desire  to  win."  (16) 
That  this  is  an  accurate  analysis  is,  I  think,  proved  by 
the  fact  that  the  biggest  strikes  and  the  most  unruly  are 
invariably  to  be  found  at  the  very  beginning  of  the 
attempts  to  organize  trade  unions.  That  is  certainly 
true  of  England,  and  in  our  own  country  the  great  strikes 
of  the  seventies  were  the  birth-signs  of  trade  unionism. 
In  France,  Italy,  and  Spain,  where  trade  unionism  is  still 
in  its  infancy,  we  find  that  strikes  are  more  unruly  and 
violent  than  in  other  countries.  It  is  a  mistake  to  believe 
that  riots,  sabotage,  and  crime  are  the  result  of  organiza- 
tion, or  the  product  of  a  philosophy  of  action.  They  are 
the  acts  of  the  weak  and  the  desperate;  the  product  of 
a  mob  psychology  that  seems  to  be  roused  to  action  when- 
ever and  wherever  the  workers  first  begin  to  realize  the 
faintest  glimmering  of  solidarity.    History  clearly  proves 


THE  NEWEST  ANARCHISM  245 

that  turbulence  in  strikes  tends  to  disappear  as  the  work- 
ers develop  organized  strength.  In  most  countries  vio- 
lence has  been  frankly  recognized  as  a  weakness,  and 
tremendous  efforts  have  been  made  by  the  workers  them- 
selves to  render  violence  unnecessary  by  developing  power 
through  organization.  But  in  France  the  very  acts  that 
result  from  weakness  and  despair  have  been  greeted 
with  enthusiasm  by  the  anarchists  and  the  effete  intel- 
lectuals as  the  beginning  of  new  and  improved  revolu- 
tionary methods. 

Both,  then,  in  their  philosophy  and  in  their  methods, 
anarchism  and  syndicalism  have  much  in  common,  but 
there  also  exist  certain  differences  which  cannot  be  over- 
looked.    Anarchism  is  a  doctrine  of  individualism;  syn- 
dicalism is  a  doctrine  of  working-class  action.    Anarchism 
appeals  only  to  the  individual;  syndicalism  appeals  also 
to  a  class.     Furthermore,  anarchism  is  a   remnant  of 
eighteenth-century   philosophy,   while    syndicalism   is    a 
product   of   an   immature    factory   system.      Marx   and 
Engels  frequently  spoke  of  anarchism  as  a  petty-bour- 
geois philosophy,  but  in  the  early  syndicalism  of  Robert 
Owen  they  saw  more  than  that,  considering  it  as  the 
forerunner  of  an  actual  working-class  movement.   When 
these  differences  have  been  stated,  there  is  little  more  to 
be  said,  and,  on  the  whole,  Yvetot  was  justified  in  say- 
ing at  the  congress  of  Toulouse    (1910)  :     "I  am  re- 
proached with  confusing  syndicalism  and  anarchism.     It 
is  not  my  fault  if  anarchism  and  syndicalism  have  the 
same  ends  in  view.     The  former  pursues  the  integral 
emancipation  of  the   individual;  the  latter  the  integral 
emancipation  of  the  workingman.     I  find  the  whole  of 
syndicalism    in    anarchism."     (17)       When    we    leave 
the  theories   of  syndicalism   to  study  its   methods,   we 
find  them  identical  with  those  of  the  anarchists.     The 


246      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

general  strike  is,  after  all,  exactly  the  same  method  that 
Bakounin  was  constantly  advocating  in  the  days  of  the 
old  International.  The  only  difference  is  this,  that  Ba- 
kounin sought  the  aid  of  "the  people,"  while  the  syndical- 
ists rely  upon  the  working  class.  Furthermore,  when  one 
places  the  statement  of  Guerard  on  the  general  strike  * 
alongside  of  the  statement  of  Kropotkin  on  the  revolu- 
tion,! one  can  observe  no  important  difference. 

While  it  is  true  that  some  syndicalists  believe  that  the 
general  strike  may  be  solely  a  peaceable  abstention  from 
work,  most  of  them  are  convinced  that  such  a  strike 
would  surely  meet  with  defeat.  As  Buisson  says:  "If 
the  general  strike  remains  the  revolution  of  folded  arms, 
if  it  does  not  degenerate  into  a  violent  insurrection,  one 
cannot  see  how  a  cessation  of  work  of  fifteen,  thirty,  or 
even  sixty  days  could  bring  into  the  industrial  regime 
and  into  the  present  social  system  changes  great  enough 
to  determine  their  fall."  (18)  To  be  sure,  the  syndical- 
ists do  not  lay  so  much  emphasis  on  the  abolition  of 
government  as  do  the  anarchists,  but  their  plan  leads  to 
nothing  less  than  that.  If  "the  capitalist  class  is  to  be 
locked  out" — whatever  that  may  mean — one  must  con- 
clude that  the  workers  intend  in  some  manner  without 
the  use  of  public  powers  to  gain  control  of  the  tools  of 
production.  In  any  case,  they  will  be  forced,  in  order 
to  achieve  any  possible  success,  to  take  the  factories,  the 
mines,  and  the  mills  and  to  put  the  work  of  production 
into  the  hands  of  the  masses.  If  the  State  interferes,  as 
it  undoubtedly  will  in  the  most  vigorous  manner,  the 
strikers  will  be  forced  to  fight  the  State.  In  other  words, 
the  general  strike  will  necessarily  become  an  insurrection, 
and  the  people  without  arms  will  be  forced  to  carry  on  a 

*  See  pp.  234,  235,  supra. 
f  See  p.  52,  supra. 


THE  NEWEST  ANARCHISM  247 

civil  war  against  the  military  powers  of  the  Government. 

If  the  general  strike,  therefore,  is  only  insurrection 
in  disguise,  sabotage  is  but  another  name  for  the  Propa- 
ganda of  the  Deed.  Only,  in  this  case,  the  deed  is  to  be 
committed  against  the  capitalist,  while  with  the  older 
anarchists  a  crowned  head,  a  general,  or  a  police  official 
was  the  one  to  be  destroyed.  To-day  property  is  to  be 
assailed,  machines  broken  and  smashed,  mines  flooded, 
telegraph  wires  cut,  and  any  other  methods  used  that  will 
render  the  tools  of  production  unusable.  This  deed  may 
be  committed  en  masse,  or  it  may  be  committed  by  an 
individual.  It  is  when  Pouget  grows  enthusiastic  over 
sabotage  that  we  find  in  him  the  same  spirit  that  actuated 
Brousse  and  Kropotkin  when  they  despaired  of  education 
and  sought  to  arouse  the  people  by  committing  dramatic 
acts  of  violence.  In  other  words,  the  saboteur  abandons 
mass  action  in  favor  of  ineffective  and  futile  assaults 
upon  men  or  property. 

This  brief  survey  of  the  meaning  of  syndicalism, 
whence  it  came,  and  why,  explains  the  antagonism  that 
had  to  arise  between  it  and  socialism.*  Not  only  was  it 
frankly  intended  to  displace  the  socialist  political  parties 

*  I  have  not  dealt  in  this  chapter  with  the  Industrial  Workers 
of  the  World,  which  is  the  American  representative  of  syndi- 
calist ideas.  First,  because  the  American  organization  has  de- 
veloped no  theories  of  importance.  Their  chief  work  has  been 
to  popularize  some  of  the  French  ideas.  Second,  because  the 
I.  W.  W.  has  not  yet  won  for  itself  a  place  in  the  labor  move- 
ment. It  has  done  much  agitation,  but  as  yet  no  organization 
to  speak  of.  Furthermore,  there  is  great  confusion  of  ideas 
among  the  various  factions  and  elements,  and  it  would  be  diffi- 
cult to  state  views  which  are  held  in  common  by  all  of  them. 
It  should  be  said,  however,  that  all  the  American  syndicalists 
have  emphasized  industrial  unionism,  that  is  to  say,  organiza- 
tion by  industries  instead  of  by  crafts — an  idea  that  the  French 
lay  no  stress  upon. 


248      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

of  Europe,  but  every  step  it  has  taken  was  accompanied 
with  an  attack  upon  the  doctrines  and  the  methods  of 
modern  socialism.  And,  in  fact,  the  syndicalists  are  most 
interesting  when  they  leave  their  own  thoeries  and  turn 
their  guns  upon  the  socialist  parties  of  the  present  day. 
In  reading  the  now  extensive  literature  on  syndicalism, 
one  finds  endless  chapters  devoted  to  pointing  out  the 
weaknesses  and  faults  of  political  socialism.  Like  the 
Bakouninists,  the  chief  strength  of  the  revolutionary 
unionists  lies  in  criticism  rather  than  in  any  constructive 
thought  or  action  of  their  own.  The  battle  of  to-day 
is,  however,  a  very  unequal  one.  In  the  International, 
two  groups — comparatively  alike  in  size — fought  over 
certain  theories  that,  up  to  that  time,  were  not  embodied 
in  a  movement.  They  quarreled  over  tactics  that  were 
yet  untried  and  over  theories  that  were  then  purely  specu- 
lative. To-day  the  syndicalists  face  a  foe  that  embraces 
millions  of  loyal  adherents.  At  the  international  gather- 
ings of  trade-union  officials,  as  well  as  at  the  immense 
international  congresses  of  the  socialist  parties,  the  syndi- 
calists find  themselves  in  a  hopeless  minority.*  Socialism 
is  no  longer  an  unembodied  project  of  Marx.  It  is  a 
throbbing,  moving,  struggling  force.  It  is  in  a  daily  fight 
with  the  evils  of  capitalism.  It  is  at  work  in  every  strike, 
in  every  great  agitation,  in  every  parliament,  in  every 
council.  It  is  a  thing  of  incessant  action,  whose  mistakes 
are  many  and  whose  failures  stand  out  in  relief.    Those 

*  At  the  Sixth  International  Conference  of  the  National  Trade 
Union  Centers,  held  in  Paris,  1909,  the  French  syndicalists  en- 
deavored to  persuade  the  trade  unions  to  hold  periodical  inter- 
national trade-union  congresses  that  would  rival  the  interna- 
tional socialist  congresses.  The  proposition  was  so  strongly  op- 
posed by  all  countries  except  France  that  the  motion  was  with- 
drawn. 


THE  NEWEST  ANARCHISM  249 

who  have  betrayed  it  can  be  pointed  out.  Those  who  have 
lost  all  revolutionary  fervor  and  all  notion  of  class  can 
be  held  up  as  a  tendency.  Those  who  have  fallen  into 
the  traps  of  the  bureaucrats  and  have  given  way  to  the 
flattery  or  to  the  corruption  of  the  bourgeoisie  can  be 
listed  and  put  upon  the  index.  Even  working-class 
political  action  can  be  assailed  as  never  before,  because 
it  now  exists  for  the  first  time  in  history,  and  its  every 
weakness  is  known.  Moreover,  there  are  the  slowness  of 
movement  and  the  seemingly  increasing  tameness  of  the 
multitude.  All  these  incidents  in  the  growth  of  a  vast 
movement — the  rapidity  of  whose  development  has 
never  been  equaled  in  the  history  of  the  world — irritate 
beyond  measure  the  impatient  and  ultra-revolutionary  ex- 
ponents of  the  new  anarchism. 

Naturally  enough,  the  criticisms  of  the  syndicalists 
are  leveled  chiefly  against  political  action,  parliamentar- 
ism, and  Statism.  It  is  Professor  Arturo  Labriola,  the 
brilliant  leader  of  the  Italian  syndicalists,  who  has  voiced 
perhaps  most  concretely  these  strictures  against  socialism, 
although  they  abound  in  all  syndicalist  writings.  Ac- 
cording to  Labriola,  the  socialist  parties  have  abandoned 
Marx.  They  have  left  the  field  of  the  class  struggle, 
foresworn  revolution,  and  degenerated  into  weaklings 
and  ineffectuals  who  dare  openly  neither  to  advocate 
"State  socialism"  nor  to  oppose  it.  In  the  last  chapter 
of  his  "Karl  Marx"  Labriola  traces  some  of  the  tenden- 
cies to  State  socialism.  He  observes  that  the  State  is 
gradually  taking  over  all  the  great  public  utilities  and 
that  cities  and  towns  are  increasingly  municipalizing  pub- 
lic services.  In  the  more  liberal  and  democratic  coun- 
tries "the  tendency  to  State  property  was  greeted,"  he 
says,  "as  the  beginning  of  the  socialist  transformation. 
To-day,  in  France,   in  Italy,  and  in  Austria   socialism 


250      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

is  being  confounded  with  Statism  (I'etatisme)  .  .  .  The 
socialist  party,  almost  everywhere,  has  become  the  party 
of  State  capitalism."  It  is  "no  more  the  representa- 
tive of  a  movement  which  ranges  itself  against  existing 
institutions,  but  rather  of  an  evolution  which  is  taking 
place  now  in  the  midst  of  present-day  society,  and  by 
means  of  the  State  itself.  The  socialist  party,  by  the 
very  force  of  circumstances,  is  becoming  a  conservative 
party  which  is  declaring  for  a  transformation,  the  agent 
of  which  is  no  longer  the  proletariat  itself,  but  the  new 
economic  organism  which  is  the  State.  .  .  .  Even  the  de- 
sire of  the  workingmen  themselves  to  pass  into  the  service 
of  the  State  is  eager  and  spontaneous.  We  have  a  proof 
of  it  in  Italy  with  the  railway  workers,  who,  however, 
represent  one  of  the  best-informed  and  most  advanced 
sections  of  the  working  class. 

".  .  .  Where  the  Marxian  tradition  has  no  stability, 
as  in  Italy,  the  socialist  party  refused  to  admit  that  the 
State  was  an  exclusively  capitalist  organism  and  that  it 
was  necessary  to  challenge  its  action.  And  with  this  pro- 
State  attitude  of  the  socialist  party  all  its  ideas  have  un- 
consciously changed.  The  principles  of  State  enterprise 
(order,  discipline,  hierarchy,  subordination,  maximum 
productivity,  etc.)  are  the  same  as  those  of  private  en- 
terprise. Wherever  the  socialist  party  openly  takes  its 
stand  on  the  side  of  the  State — contrary  even  to  its  in- 
tentions— it  acquires  an  entirely  capitalist  viewpoint.  Its 
embarrassed  attitude  in  regard  to  the  insubordination  of 
the  workers  in  private  manufacture  becomes  each  day 
more  evident,  and,  if  it  were  not  afraid  of  losing  its 
electoral  support,  it  would  oppose  still  more  the  spirit 
of  revolt  among  the  workers.  It  is  thus  that  the  socialist 
party — the  conservative  party  of  the  future  transformed 
State — is  becoming  the  conservative  party  of  the  present 


THE  NEWEST  ANARCHISM  251 

social  organization.  But  even  where,  as  in  Germany,  the 
Marxian  tradition  still  assumes  the  form  of  a  creed  to  all 
outward  appearance,  the  party  is  very  far  from  keeping 
within  the  limits  of  pure  Marxian  theory.  Its  anti-State 
attitude  is  not  one  of  inclination.  It  is  imposed  by  the 
State  itself,  .  .  .  the  adversary,  through  its  military  and 
feudal  vanity,  of  every  concession  to  working-class  de- 
mocracy." (19) 

All  this  sounds  most  familiar,  and  I  cannot  resist  quot- 
ing here  our  old  friend  Bakounin  in  order  to  show  how 
much  this  criticism  resembles  that  of  the  anarchists.  If 
we  turn  to  "Statism  and  Anarchy"  we  find  that  Bakounin 
concluded  this  work  with  the  following  words:  "Upon 
the  Pangermanic  banner"  (*.  e.,  also  upon  the  banner  of 
German  social  democracy,  and,  consequently,  upon  the 
socialist  banner  of  the  whole  civilized  world)  "is  in- 
scribed :  The  conservation  and  strengthening  of  the  State 
at  all  costs;  on  the  socialist-revolutionary  banner"  (read 
Bakouninist  banner)  "is  inscribed  in  characters  of  blood, 
in  letters  of  fire :  the  abolition  of  all  States,  the  destruc- 
tion of  bourgeois  civilization ;  free  organization  from  the 
bottom  to  the  top,  by  the  help  of  free  associations ;  the 
organization  of  the  working  populace  (sic!)  freed  from 
all  the  trammels,  the  organization  of  the  whole  of  emanci- 
pated humanity,  the  creation  of  a  new  human  world."  * 
Thus  frantically  Bakounin  exposed  the  antagonism  be- 
tween his  philosophy  and  that  of  the  Marxists.  It  would 
seem,  therefore,  that  if  Labriola  knew  his  Marx,  he 
would  hardly  undertake  at  this  late  date  to  save  socialism 
from  a  tendency  that  Marx  himself  gave  it.  The  State, 
it  appears,  is  the  same  bugaboo  to  the  syndicalists  that 
it  is  to  the  anarchists.  It  is  almost  something  personal, 
a  kind  of  monster  that,  in  all  ages  and  times,  must  be 

♦The  comments  are  by  Plechanoff.   (20) 


252       VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

oppressive.  It  cannot  evolve  or  change  its  being.  It  can- 
not serve  the  working  class  as  it  has  previously  served 
feudalism,  or  as  it  now  serves  capitalism.  It  is  an  un- 
changeable thing,  that,  regardless  of  economic  and  social 
conditions,  must  remain  eternally  the  enemy  of  the  peo- 
ple. 

Evidently,  the  syndicalist  identifies  the  revolutionist 
with  the  anti- Statist — apparently  forgetting  that  hatred 
of  the  State  is  often  as  strong  among  the  bourgeoisie  as 
among  the  workers.  The  determination  to  limit  the 
power  of  the  Government  was  not  only  a  powerful  factor 
in  the  French  and  American  Revolutions,  but  since  then 
the  slaveholders  of  the  Southern  States  in  America,  the 
factory  owners  of  all  countries,  and  the  trusts  have  ex- 
hausted every  means,  fair  and  foul,  to  limit  and  to 
weaken  the  power  of  the  State.  What  difference  is  there 
between  the  theory  of  laissez-faire  and  the  antagonism  of 
the  anarchists  and  the  syndicalists  to  every  activity  of  the 
State  ?  However,  it  is  noteworthy  that  antagonism  to  the 
State  disappears  on  the  part  of  any  group  or  class  as 
soon  as  it  becomes  an  agency  for  advancing  their  ma- 
terial well-being;  they  not  only  then  forsake  their  anti- 
Statism,  they  even  become  the  most  ardent  defenders 
of  the  State.  Evidently,  then,  it  is  not  the  State  that 
has  to  be  overcome,  but  the  interests  that  control  the 
State. 

It  must  be  admitted  that  Labriola  sketches  accurately 
enough  the  prevailing  tendency  toward  State  ownership, 
but  he  misunderstands  or  wilfully  misinterprets,  as  Ba- 
kounin  did  before  him,  the  attitude  of  the  avowed  social- 
ist parties  toward  such  evolution.  When  he  declares  that 
they  confuse  their  socialism  with  Statism,  he  might 
equally  well  argue  that  socialists  confuse  their  socialism 
with  monopoly  or  with  the  aggregation  of  capital  in  the 


THE  NEWEST  ANARCHISM  253 

hands  of  the  few.  Because  socialists  recognize  the  in- 
evitable evolution  toward  monopoly  is  no  reason  for 
believing  that  they  advocate  monopoly.  Nowhere  have 
the  socialists  ever  advised  the  destruction  of  trusts,  nor 
have  they  anywhere  opposed  the  taking  over  of  great  in- 
dustries by  the  State.  They  realize  that,  as  monopoly 
is  an  inevitable  outcome  of  capitalism,  so  State  capitalism, 
more  or  less  extended,  is  an  inevitable  result  of  monopoly. 
That  the  workers  remain  wage  earners  and  are  exploited 
in  the  same  manner  as  before  has  been  pointed  out  again 
and  again  by  all  the  chief  socialists.  However,  if  socialists 
prefer  monopoly  to  the  chaos  of  competition  and  to  the 
reactionary  tendencies  of  small  property,  and  if  they 
lend  themselves,  as  they  do  everywhere,  to  the  promo- 
tion of  the  State  ownership  of  monopoly,  it  is  not  be- 
cause they  confuse  monopoly,  whether  private  or  public, 
with  socialism.  It  is  of  little  consequence  whether  the 
workers  are  exploited  by  the  trusts  or  by  the  Government. 
As  long  as  capitalism  exists  they  will  be  exploited  by  the 
one  or  the  other.  If  they  themselves  prefer  to  be  ex- 
ploited by  the  Government,  as  Labriola  admits,  and  if 
that  exploitation  is  less  ruinous  to  the  body  and  mind 
of  the  worker,  the  socialist  who  opposed  State  capitalism 
in  favor  of  private  capitalism  would  be  nothing  less  than 
a  reactionary. 

Without,  however,  leaving  the  argument  here,  it  must 
be  said  that  there  are  various  reasons  why  the  socialist 
prefers  State  capitalism  to  private  capitalism.  It  has 
certain  advantages  for  the  general  public.  It  confers 
certain  benefits  upon  the  toilers,  chief  of  all  perhaps  the 
regularity  of  work.  And,  above  and  beyond  this,  State 
capitalism  is  actually  expropriating  private  capitalists. 
The  more  property  the  State  owns,  the  fewer  will  be  the 
number  of  capitalists  to  be  dealt  with,  and  the  easier  it 


254      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

will  be  eventually  to  introduce  socialism.  Indeed,  to 
proceed  from  State  capitalism  to  socialism  is  little  more 
than  the  grasp  of  public  powers  by  the  working  class,  fol- 
lowed by  the  administrative  measures  of  industrial  de- 
mocracy. All  this,  of  course,  has  been  said  before  by 
Engels,  part  of  whose  argument  I  have  already  quoted. 
Unfortunately,  no  syndicalist  seems  to  follow  this  reason- 
ing or  excuse  what  he  considers  the  terrible  crime  of  ex- 
tending the  domain  of  the  State.  Not  infrequently  his 
revolutionary  philosophy  begins  with  the  abolition  of  the 
State,  and  often  it  ends  there.  Marx,  Engels,  and  Ecca- 
rius,  as  we  know,  ridiculed  Bakounin's  terror  of  the 
State ;  and  how  many  times  since  have  the  socialists  been 
compelled  to  deal  with  this  bugaboo !  It  rises  up  in  every 
country  from  time  to  time.  The  anarchist,  the  anarchist- 
communist,  the  Lokalisten,  the  anarcho-socialist,  the 
young  socialist,  and  the  syndicalist  have  all  in  their  time 
solemnly  come  to  warn  the  working  class  of  this  insidious 
enemy.  But  the  workers  refuse  to  be  frightened,  and  in 
every  country,  including  even  Russia,  Italy,  and  France, 
they  have  less  fear  of  State  ownership  of  industry  than 
they  have  of  that  crushing  exploitation  which  they  know 
to-day. 

Even  in  Germany,  where  Labriola  considers  the  so- 
cialists to  be  more  or  less  free  from  the  taint  of  State 
capitalism,  they  have  from  the  very  beginning  voted 
for  State  ownership.  As  early  as  1870  the  German  social- 
ists, upon  a  resolution  presented  by  Bebel,  adopted  by  a 
large  majority  the  proposition  that  the  State  should  re- 
tain in  its  hands  the  State  lands,  Church  lands,  communal 
lands,  the  mines,  and  the  railroads.*    When  adopting  the 

*It  should,  however,  be  pointed  out  that  the  German  social 
democrats  voted  at  first  against  the  State  ownership  of  railroads, 
because  it  was  considered  a  military  measure. 


THE  NEWEST  ANARCHISM  255 

new  party  program   at   Erfurt  in    1891,   the   Congress 
struck  out  the  section  directed  against  State  socialism 
and  adopted  a  number  of  propositions  leading  to  that 
end.     Again,  at  Breslau  in  1895,  the  Germans  adopted 
several  State-socialist  measures.     "At  this  time,"   says 
Paul  Kampffmeyer,  "a  proposition  of  the  agrarian  com- 
mission on  the  party  program,  which  had  a  decided  State- 
socialist   stamp,   was   discussed.       It   contained,    among 
other  things,  the  retaining  and  the  increase  of  the  public 
land  domain;  the  management  of  the  State  and  com- 
munity lands  on  their  own  account ;  the  giving  of  State 
credit  to  cooperative  societies ;  the  socialization  of  mort- 
gages, debts,  and  loans  on  land ;  the  socialization  of  chat- 
tel and  real  estate  insurance,  etc.     Bebel  agreed  to  all 
these  State-socialist  propositions.     He  recalled  the  fact 
that  the  nationalizing  of  the  railroads  had  been  accom- 
plished  with   the   agreement   of   the   social-democracy." 
(21)     "That  which  applies  to  the  railways  applies  also 
to  the  forestry,"  said  Bebel.     "Have  we  any  objections 
to  the  enlarging  of  the  State  forests  and  thereby  the 
employment  of  workers  and  officials?     The  same  thing 
applies  to  the  mines,  the  salt  industry,  road-making,  the 
post  office,  and  the  telegraphs.    In  all  of  these  industries 
we  have  hundreds  of  thousands  of  dependent  people, 
and  yet  we  do  not  want  to  advocate  their  abolition  but 
rather  their  extension.     In  this  direction  we  must  break 
with  all  our  prejudices.    We  ought  only  to  oppose  State 
industry  where  it  is  antagonistic  to  culture  and  where 
it  restricts  development,  as,  for  instance,  is  the  case  in 
military  matters.    Indeed,  we  must  even  compel  the  State 
constantly  to  take  over  means  of  culture,  because  by  that 
means  we  will  finally  put  the  present  State  out  of  joint. 
And,  lastly,  even  the  strongest  State  power  fails  in  that 
degree  in  which  the  State  drives  its  own  officers  and 


256      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

workers  into  opposition  to  itself,  as  has  occurred  in 
the  case  of  the  postal  service.  The  attitude  which  would 
refuse  to  strengthen  the  power  of  the  State,  because  this 
would  entrust  to  it  the  solution  of  the  problems  of  cul- 
ture, smacks  of  the  Manchester  school.  We  must  strip 
off  these  Manchesterian  egg-shells."  (22) 

Wilhelm  Liebknecht  also  dealt  with  those  who  op- 
posed the  strengthening  of  the  class  State.  "We  are 
concerned,"  he  said,  ".  .  .  first  of  all  about  the  strength- 
ening of  the  State  power.  In  all  similar  cases  we  have 
decided  in  favor  of  practical  activity.  We  allowed  funds 
for  the  Northeast  Sea  Canal ;  we  voted  for  the  labor 
legislation,  although  the  proposed  laws  did  decidedly  ex- 
tend the  State  power.  We  are  in  favor  of  the  State 
railways,  although  we  have  thereby  brought  about  .  .  . 
the  dependence  of  numerous  livings  upon  the  State." 
(23)  As  early,  indeed,  as  1881  Liebknecht  saw  that  the 
present  State  was  preparing  the  way  for  socialism. 
Speaking  of  the  compulsory  insurance  laws  proposed  by 
Bismarck,  he  refers  to  such  legislation  as  embodying 
"in  a  decisive  manner  the  principle  of  State  regulation  of 
production  as  opposed  to  the  laissez-faire  system  of  the 
Manchester  school.  The  right  of  the  State  to  regulate 
production  supposes  the  duty  of  the  State  to  interest  it- 
self in  labor,  and  State  control  of  the  labor  of  society 
leads  directly  to  State  organization  of  the  labor  of  so- 
ciety." (24)  Further  even  than  this  goes  Karl  Kautsky, 
who  has  been  called  the  "acutest  observer  and  thinker  of 
modern  socialism."  "Among  the  social  organizations  in 
existence  to-day,"  he  says,  "there  is  but  one  that  possesses 
the  requisite  dimensions,  and  may  be  used  as  the  frame- 
work for  the  establishment  and  development  of  the 
socialist  commonwealth,  and  that  is  the  modern 
State."  (25) 


THE  NEWEST  ANARCHISM  257 

Without  going  needlessly  far  into  this  subject,  it 
seems  safe  to  conclude  that  the  State  is  no  more  terri- 
fying to  the  modern  socialist  than  it  was  to  Marx  and 
Engels.  There  is  not  a  socialist  party  in  any  country 
that  has  not  used  its  power  to  force  the  State  to  under- 
take collective  enterprise.  Indeed,  all  the  immediate 
programs  of  the  various  socialist  parties  advocate  the 
strengthening  of  the  economic  power  of  the  State.  They 
are  adding  more  and  more  to  its  functions ;  they  are 
broadening  its  scope ;  and  they  are,  without  question, 
vastly  increasing  its  power.  But,  at  the  same  time,  they 
are  democratizing  the  State.  By  direct  legislation,  by  a 
variety  of  political  reforms,  and  by  the  power  of  the 
great  socialist  parties  themselves,  they  are  really  wrest- 
ing the  control  of  the  State  from  the  hands  of  special 
privilege.  Furthermore — and  this  is  something  neither 
the  anarchists  nor  the  syndicalists  will  see — State  social- 
ism is  in  itself  undermining  and  slowly  destroying  the 
class  character  of  the  State.  According  to  the  view  of 
Marx,  the  State  is  to-day  "but  a  committee  for  managing 
the  common  affairs  of  the  whole  capitalist  class."  (26) 
And  it  is  this  because  the  economic  power  of  the  capital- 
ist class  is  supreme.  But  by  the  growth  of  State  social- 
ism the  economic  power  of  the  private  capitalists  is 
steadily  weakened.  The  railroads,  the  mines,  the  forests, 
and  other  great  monopolies  are  taken  out  of  their  hands, 
and,  to  the  extent  that  this  happens,  their  control  over 
the  State  itself  disappears.  Their  only  power  to  control 
the  State  is  their  economic  power,  and,  if  that  were  en- 
tirely to  disappear,  the  class  character  of  the  State  would 
disappear  also.  "The  State  is  not  abolished.  It  dies 
out";  to  repeat  Engels'  notable  words.  "As  soon  as  there 
is  no  longer  any  social  class  to  be  held  in  subjection, 
.  .  .  nothing  more  remains  to  be  repressed,  and  a  special 


258      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

repressive  force,  a  State,  is  no  longer  necessary."  (27) 
The  syndicalists  are,  of  course,  quite  right  when  they 
say  that  State  socialism  is  an  attempt  to  allay  popular 
discontent,  but  they  are  quite  wrong  when  they  accept 
this  as  proof  that  it  must  inevitably  sidetrack  socialism. 
They  overlook  the  fact  that  it  is  always  a  concession 
granted  grudgingly  to  the  growing  power  of  democracy. 
It  is  a  point  yielded  in  order  to  prevent  if  possible  the 
necessity  of  making  further  concessions.  Yet  history 
shows  that  each  concession  necessitates  another,  and  that 
State  socialism  is  growing  with  great  rapidity  in  all 
countries  where  the  workers  have  developed  powerful 
political  organizations.  Even  now  both  friends  and  op- 
ponents see  in  the  growth  of  State  socialism  the  gradual 
formation  of  that  transitional  stage  that  leads  from 
capitalism  to  socialism.  The  syndicalist  and  anarchist 
alone  fail  to  see  here  any  drift  toward  socialism;  they 
see  only  a  growing  tyranny  creating  a  class  of  favored 
civil  servants,  who  are  divorced  from  the  actual  working 
class.  At  the  same  time,  they  point  out  that  the  condition 
of  the  toilers  for  the  State  has  not  improved,  and  that 
they  are  exploited  as  mercilessly  by  the  State  as  they 
were  formerly  exploited  by  the  capitalist.  To  dispute  this 
would  be  time  ill  spent.  If  it  be  indeed  true,  it  defeats 
the  argument  of  the  syndicalist.  If  the  State  in  its  capi- 
talism outrageously  exploits  its  servants,  tries  to  pre- 
vent them  from  organizing,  and  penalizes  them  for  strik- 
ing, it  will  only  add  to  the  intensity  of  the  working-class 
revolt.  It  will  aid  more  and  more  toward  creating  a 
common  understanding  between  the  workers  for  the  State 
and  the  workers  for  the  private  capitalist.  In  any  case, 
it  will  accelerate  the  tendency  toward  the  democratiza- 
tion of  the  State  and,  therefore,  toward  socialism. 

As  an  alternative  to  this  actual  evolution  toward  social- 


THE  NEWEST  ANARCHISM  259 

ism,  the  syndicalists  propose  to  force  society  to  put  the 
means  of  production  into  the  hands  of  the  trade  unions. 
It  is  perhaps  worth  pointing  out  that  Owen,  Proudhon, 
Blanc,  Lassalle,  and  Bakounin  all  advocated  what  may 
be  called  "group  socialism."  (28)  This  conception  of 
future  society  contemplates  the  ownership  of  the  mines 
by  the  miners,  of  the  railroads  by  the  railway  workers, 
of  the  land  by  the  peasants.  All  the  workers  in  the  vari- 
ous industries  are  to  be  organized  into  unions  and  then 
brought  together  in  a  federation.  Several  objections  are 
made  to  this  outline  of  a  new  society.  In  the  first  place, 
it  is  artificial.  Except  for  an  occasional  cooperative  un- 
dertaking, there  is  not,  nor  has  there  ever  been,  any 
tendency  toward  trade-union  ownership  of  industry.  In 
addition,  it  is  an  idea  that  is  to-day  an  anachronism.  It 
is  conceivable  that  small  federated  groups  might  control 
and  conduct  countless  little  industries,  but  it  is  not  con- 
ceivable that  groups  of  "self-governing,"  "autonomous," 
and  "independent"  workmen  could,  or  would,  be  allowed 
by  a  highly  industrialized  society  to  direct  and  manage 
such  vast  enterprises  as  the  trusts  have  built  up.  If 
each  group  is  to  run  industry  as  it  pleases,  the  Standard 
Oil  workers  or  the  steel  workers  might  menace  society 
in  the  future  as  the  owners  of  those  monopolies  menace 
it  in  the  present.  There  is  no  indication  in  the  litera- 
ture of  the  syndicalists,  and  certainly  no  promise  in  a 
system  of  completely  autonomous  groups  of  producers, 
of  any  solution  of  the  vast  problems  of  modern  trustified 
industry.  It  may  be  that  such  ideas  corresponded  to  the 
state  of  things  represented  in  early  capitalism.  But  the 
socialist  ideas  of  the  present  are  the  product  of  a  more 
advanced  state  of  capitalism  than  Owen,  Proudhon,  Las- 
salle, and  Bakounin  knew,  or  than  the  syndicalists  of 
France,  Italy,  and  Spain  have  yet  been  forced  seriously 


26o      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

to  deal  with.  Indeed,  it  was  necessary  for  Marx  to 
forecast  half  a  century  of  capitalist  development  in  order 
to  clarify  the  program  of  socialism  and  to  emphasize  the 
necessity  for  that  program. 

It  is  a  noteworthy  and  rather  startling  fact  that  Sidney 
and  Beatrice  Webb  had  pointed  out  the  economic  falla- 
cies of  syndicalism  before  the  French  Confederation  of 
Labor  was  founded  or  Sorel,  Berth,  and  Lagardelle  had 
written  a  line  on  the  subject.  In  their  "History  of  Trade 
Unionism"  they  tell  most  interestingly  the  story  of 
Owen's  early  trade-union  socialism.  The  book  was  pub- 
lished in  1894,  two  or  three  years  before  the  theories 
of  the  French  school  were  born.  Nevertheless,  their 
critique  of  Owenism  expresses  as  succinctly  and  forcibly 
as  anything  yet  written  the  attitude  of  the  socialists  to- 
ward the  economics  of  modern  syndicalism.  "Of  all 
Owen's  attempts  to  reduce  his  socialism  to  practice," 
write  the  Webbs,  "this  was  certainly  the  very  worst. 
For  his  short-lived  communities  there  was  at  least  this 
excuse :  that  within  their  own  area  they  were  to  be  per- 
fectly homogeneous  little  socialist  States.  There  were 
to  be  no  conflicting  sections,  and  profit-making  and  com- 
petition were  to  be  effectually  eliminated.  But  in  'the 
Trades  Union,'  as  he  conceived  it,  the  mere  combination 
of  all  the  workmen  in  a  trade  as  cooperative  producers 
no  more  abolished  commercial  competition  than  a  com- 
bination of  all  the  employers  in  it  as  a  joint  stock  com- 
pany. In  effect,  his  Grand  Lodges  would  have  been 
simply  the  head  offices  of  huge  joint  stock  companies 
owning  the  entire  means  of  production  in  their  in- 
dustry, and  subject  to  no  control  by  the  community  as  a 
whole.  They  would,  therefore,  have  been  in  a  position 
at  any  moment  to  close  their  ranks  and  admit  fresh  gen- 
erations of  workers  only  as  employees  at  competitive 


THE  NEWEST  ANARCHISM  261 

wages  instead  of  as  shareholders,  thus  creating  at  one 
stroke  a  new  capitalist  class  and  a  new  proletariat.  (29) 
...  In  short,  the  socialism  of  Owen  led  him  to  propose 
a  practical  scheme  which  was  not  even  socialistic,  and 
which,  if  it  could  possibly  have  been  carried  out,  would 
have  simply  arbitrarily  redistributed  the  capital  of  the 
country  without  altering  or  superseding  the  capitalist 
system  in  the  least."  (30) 

Although  this  "group  socialism"  would  certainly  neces- 
sitate a  Parliament  in  order  to  harmonize  the  conflicting 
interests  of  the  various  productive  associations,  there  is 
nothing,  it  appears,  that  the  syndicalist  so  much  abhors. 
He  is  never  quite  done  with  picturing  the  burlesque  of 
parliamentarism.  While,  no  doubt,  this  is  a  necessary 
corollary  to  his  antagonism  to  the  State,  it  is  aggravated 
by  the  fact  that  one  of  the  chief  ends  of  a  political  party 
is  to  put  its  representatives  into  Parliament.  The  syndi- 
calist, in  ridiculing  all  parliamentary  activity,  is  at  the 
same  time,  therefore,  endeavoring  to  prove  the  folly  of 
political  action.  That  you  cannot  bring  into  the  world 
a  new  social  order  by  merely  passing  laws  is  something 
the  syndicalist  never  wearies  of  pointing  out.  Parlia- 
mentarism, he  likes  to  repeat,  is  a  new  superstition  that 
is  weakening  the  activity  and  paralyzing  the  mentality  of 
the  working  class.  "The  superstitious  belief  in  parlia- 
mentary action,"  Leone  says,  ".  .  .  ascribes  to  acts  of 
Parliament  the  magic  power  of  bringing  about  new  social 
forces."  (31)  Sorel  refers  to  the  same  thing  as  the 
"belief  in  the  magic  influence  of  departmental  authority," 

(32)  while  Labriola  divines  that  "parties  may  elect  mem- 
bers of  Parliament,  but  they  cannot  set  one  machine  go- 
ing, nor  can  they  organize  one  business  undertaking." 

(33)  All  this  reminds  one  of  what  Marx  himself  said  in 
the  early  fifties.    He  speaks  in  "Revolution  and  Counter- 


262       VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

Revolution,"  a  collection  of  some  articles  that  were  orig- 
inally written  for  the  New  York  Tribune,  of  "parlia- 
mentary cretinism,  a  disorder  which  penetrates  its  un- 
fortunate victims  with  the  solemn  conviction  that  the 
whole  world,  its  history  and  future,  are  governed  and 
determined  by  a  majority  of  votes  in  that  particular 
representative  body  which  has  the  honor  to  count  them 
among  its  members,  and  that  all  and  everything  going  on 
outside  the  walls  of  their  house — wars,  revolutions,  rail- 
way constructing,  colonizing  of  whole  new  continents, 
California  gold  discoveries,  Central  American  canals, 
Russian  armies,  and  whatever  else  may  have  some  little 
claim  to  influence  upon  the  destinies  of  mankind — is 
nothing  compared  with  the  incommensurable  events  hing- 
ing upon  the  important  question,  whatever  it  may  be, 
just  at  that  moment  occupying  the  attention  of  their 
honorable  house."  (34) 

No  one  can  read  this  statement  of  Marx's  without 
realizing  its  essential  truthfulness.  But  it  should  not  be 
forgotten  that  Marx  himself  believed,  and  every  prom- 
inent socialist  believes,  that  the  control  of  the  parliaments 
of  the  world  is  essential  to  any  movement  that  seeks  to 
transform  the  world.  The  powerlessness  of  parliaments 
may  be  easily  exaggerated.  To  say  that  they  are  in- 
capable of  constructive  work  is  to  deny  innumerable  facts 
of  history.  Laws  have  both  set  up  and  destroyed  indus- 
tries. The  action  of  parliaments  has  established  gigantic 
industries.  The  schools,  the  roads,  the  Panama  Canal, 
and  a  thousand  other  great  operations  known  to  us  to-day 
have  been  set  going  by  parliaments.  Tariff  laws  make 
and  destroy  industries.  Prohibition  laws  have  annihilated 
industries,  while  legality,  which  is  the  peculiar  product 
of  parliaments,  has  everything  to  do  with  the  ownership 
of  property,  of  industry,  and  of  the  management  of  capi- 


THE  NEWEST  ANARCHISM  263 

tal.  For  one  who  is  attacking  a  legal  status,  who  is  en- 
deavoring to  alter  political,  juridical,  as  well  as  industrial 
and  social  relations,  the  conquering  of  parliaments  is 
vitally  necessary.  The  socialist  recognizes  that  the  par- 
liaments of  to-day  represent  class  interests,  that,  indeed, 
they  are  dominated  by  class  interests,  and,  as  such,  that 
they  do  not  seek  to  change  but  to  conserve  what  now 
exists.  As  a  result,  there  is  a  parliamentary  cretinism, 
because,  in  a  sense,  the  dominant  elements  in  Parliament 
are  only  managing  the  affairs  of  powerful  influences 
outside  of  Parliament.  They  are  not  the  guiding  hand, 
but  the  servile  hand,  of  capitalism. 

For  the  above  reason,  chiefly,  the  syndicalists  are  on 
safe  ground  when  they  declare  that  parliaments  are  cor- 
rupt. Corruption  is  a  product  of  the  struggle  of  the 
classes.  To  obtain  special  privilege,  class  laws,  and  im- 
munity from  punishment,  the  "big  interests"  bribe  and 
corrupt  parliaments.  However,  corruption  does  not  stop 
there.  The  trade  unions  themselves  suffer.  Labor  lead- 
ers are  bought  just  as  labor  representatives  are  bought. 
Insurrection  itself  is  often  controlled  and  rendered  abor- 
tive by  corruption.  Numberless  violent  uprisings  have 
been  betrayed  by  those  who  fomented  them.  The  words 
of  Fruneau  at  Basel  in  1869  are  memorable.  "Bakounin 
has  declared,"  he  said,  "that  it  is  necessary  to  await  the 
Revolution.  Ah,  well,  the  Revolution!  Away  with  it! 
Not  that  I  fear  the  barricades,  but,  when  one  is  a 
Frenchman  and  has  seen  the  blood  of  the  bravest  of 
the  French  running  in  the  streets  in  order  to  elevate 
to  power  the  ambitious  who,  a  few  months  later,  sent  us 
to  Cayenne,  one  suspects  the  same  snares,  because  the 
Revolution,  in  view  of  the  ignorance  of  the  proletarians, 
would  take  place  only  at  the  profit  of  our  adversaries." 
(35)     There  is  no  way  to  escape  the  corrupting  power 


264      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

of  capitalism.  It  has  its  representatives  in  every  move- 
ment that  promises  to  be  hostile.  It  has  its  spies  in  the 
labor  unions,  its  agents  provocateurs  in  insurrections ; 
and  its  money  can  always  find  hands  to  accept  it.  One 
does  not  escape  corruption  by  abandoning  Parliament. 
And  Bordat,  the  anarchist,  was  the  slave  of  a  mania 
when  he  declared :  "To  send  workingmen  to  a  parlia- 
ment is  to  act  like  a  mother  who  would  take  her  daughter 
to  a  brothel."  (36)  Parliaments  are  perhaps  more  cor- 
rupt than  trade  unions,  but  that  is  simply  because  they 
have  greater  power.  To  no  small  degree  bribery  and 
campaign  funds  are  the  tribute  that  capitalism  pays  to 
the  power  of  the  State. 

The  consistent  opposition  of  the  syndicalists  to  the 
State  is  leading  them  desperately  far,  and  we  see  them 
developing,  as  the  anarchists  did  before  them,  a  con- 
tempt even  for  democracy.  The  literature  of  syndicalism 
teems  with  attacks  on  democracy.  "Syndicalism  and 
Democracy,"  says  Emile  Pouget,  "are  the  two  opposite 
poles,  which  exclude  and  neutralize  each  other.  .  .  . 
Democracy  is  a  social  superfluity,  a  parasitic  and  exter- 
nal excrescence,  while  syndicalism  is  the  logical  mani- 
festation of  a  growth  of  life,  it  is  a  rational  cohesion 
of  human  beings,  and  that  is  why,  instead  of  restraining 
their  individuality,  it  prolongs  and  develops  it."  (37) 
Democracy  is,  in  the  view  of  Sorel,  the  regime  par  ex- 
cellence, in  which  men  are  governed  "by  the  magical 
power  of  high-sounding  words  rather  than  by  ideas ;  by 
formulas  rather  than  by  reasons ;  by  dogmas,  the  origin 
of  which  nobody  cares  to  find  out,  rather  than  by  doc- 
trines based  on  observation."  (38)  Lagardelle  declares 
that  syndicalism  is  post-democratic.  "Democracy  corre- 
sponds to  a  definite  historical  movement,"  he  says,  "which 
has  come  to  an  end.     Syndicalism  is  an  anti-democratic 


THE  NEWEST  ANARCHISM  265 

movement."  (39)     These  are  but  three  out  of  a  number 
of  criticisms  of  democracy  that  might  be  quoted.     Al- 
though natural  enough  as  a  consequence  of  syndicalist 
antagonism  to  the  State,  these  ideas  are  nevertheless  fatal 
when  applied  to  the  actual  conduct  of  a  working-class 
movement.     It  means  that  the  minority  believes  that  it 
can  drive  the  majority.    We  remember  that  Guerard  sug- 
gested, in  his  advocacy  of  the  general  strike,  that,  if  the 
railroad  workers  struck,  many  other  trades  "would  be 
compelled  to  quit  work."    "A  daring  revolutionary  minor- 
ity conscious   of   its   aim  can   carry   away  with    it  the 
majority."  (40)     Pouget  confesses :  "The  syndicalist  has 
a  contempt  for  the  vulgar  idea  of  democracy — the  inert, 
unconscious  mass  is  not  to  be  taken  into  account  when 
the  minority  wishes  to  act  so  as  to  benefit  it     .     .     ." 
(41)     He  refers  in  another  place  to  the  majority,  who 
"may  be  considered  as  human  zeros.    Thus  appears  the 
enormous    difference    in    method,"    concludes    Pouget, 
"which    distinguishes    syndicalism   and   democracy:   the 
latter,  by  the  mechanism  of  universal  suffrage,  gives 
direction    to    the    unconscious     .     .     .     and    stifles    the 
minorities  who  bear  within  them  the  hopes  of  the  fu- 
ture." (42) 

This  is  anarchism  all  over  again,  from  Proudhon  to 
Goldman.  (43)  But,  while  the  Bakouninists  were  forced, 
as  a  result  of  these  views,  to  abandon  organized  effort, 
the  newest  anarchists  have  attempted  to  incorporate  these 
ideas  into  the  very  constitution  of  the  French  Confedera- 
tion of  Labor.  And  at  present  they  are,  in  fact,  a  little 
clique  that  rides  on  the  backs  of  the  organized  workers, 
and  the  majority  cannot  throw  them  off  so  long  as  a  score 
of  members  have  the  same  voting  power  in  the  Confed- 
eration as  that  of  a  trade  union  with  ten  thousand  mem- 
bers.   All  this  must,  of  course,  have  very  serious  conse- 


266      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

quences.  Opposition  to  majority  rule  has  always  been 
a  cardinal  principle  of  the  anarchists.  It  is  also  a  funda- 
mental principle  of  every  American  political  machine. 
To  defeat  democracy  is  obviously  the  chief  purpose  of  a 
Tammany  Hall.  But,  when  this  idea  is  actually  advo- 
cated as  an  ideal  of  working-class  organization,  when  it 
is  made  to  stand  as  a  policy  and  practice  of  a  trade 
union,  it  can  only  result  in  suspicion,  disruption,  and, 
eventually,  in  complete  ruin.  It  appears  that  the  militant 
syndicalist,  like  the  anarchist,  realizes  that  he  cannot  ex- 
pect the  aid  of  the  people.  He  turns,  then,  to  the  mi- 
nority, the  fighting  inner  circle,  as  the  sole  hope. 

It  is  inevitable,  therefore,  that  syndicalism  and  social- 
ism should  stand  at  opposite  poles.  They  are  exactly  as 
far  apart  as  anarchism  and  socialism.  And,  if  we  turn 
to  the  question  of  methods,  we  find  an  antagonism  almost 
equally  great.  How  are  the  workers  to  obtain  possession 
of  industry?  On  this  point,  as  well  as  upon  their  con- 
ception of  socialism,  the  syndicalists  are  not  advanced 
beyond  Owenism.  "One  question,  and  that  the  most 
immediately  important  of  all,"  say  the  Webbs,  speaking 
of  Owen's  projects,  "was  never  seriously  faced :  How 
was  the  transfer  of  the  industries  from  the  capitalists  to 
the  unions  to  be  effected  in  the  teeth  of  a  hostile  and 
well-armed  government?  The  answer  must  have  been 
that  the  overwhelming  numbers  of  'the  trades  union' 
would  render  conflict  impossible.  At  all  events,  Owen, 
like  the  early  Christians,  habitually  spoke  as  if  the  day 
of  judgment  of  the  existing  order  of  society  was  at  hand. 
The  next  six  months,  in  his  view,  were  always  going  to 
see  the  'new  moral  world'  really  established.  The  change 
from  the  capitalist  system  to  a  complete  organization  of 
industry  under  voluntary  associations  of  producers  was 
to  'come  suddenly  upon  society  like  a  thief  in  the  night.' 


THE  NEWEST  ANARCHISM  267 

.  .  .  It  is  impossible  not  to  regret  that  the  first  intro- 
duction of  the  English  Trade  Unionist  to  Socialism 
should  have  been  effected  by  a  foredoomed  scheme  which 
violated  every  economic  principle  of  collectivism,  and 
left  the  indispensable  political  preliminaries  to  pure 
chance."  (44)  Little  need  be  added  to  what  the  Webbs 
have  said  on  the  Utopian  features  of  syndicalism  or  even 
upon  the  haphazard  method  adopted  to  achieve  them. 
"No  politics  in  the  unions"  follows  logically  enough 
from  an  avowed  antagonism  to  the  State.  If  one  starts 
with  the  assumption  that  nothing  can  be  done  through 
the  State — as  Owen,  Bakounin,  and  the  syndicalists  have 
done — one  is,  of  course,  led  irretrievably  to  oppose  parlia- 
mentary and  other  political  methods  of  action. 

When  the  syndicalists  throw  over  democracy  and  fore- 
swear political  action,  they  are  fatally  driven  to  the 
point  where  they  must  abandon  the  working  class.  In 
the  meantime,  they  are  sadly  misleading  it.  It  is  when 
we  touch  this  phase  of  the  syndicalist  movement  that 
we  begin  to  discover  real  bitterness.  Here  direct  action 
stands  in  opposition  to  political  action.  The  workers 
must  choose  the  one  method  or  the  other.  The  old 
clash  appears  again  in  all  its  tempestuous  hate.  Jules 
Guesde  was  early  one  of  the  adherents  of  Bakounin,  but 
in  all  his  later  life  he  has  been  pitiless  in  his  warfare 
on  the  anarchists.  As  soon,  therefore,  as  the  direct- 
actionists  began  again  to  exercise  an  influence,  Guesde 
entered  the  field  of  battle.  I  happened  to  be  at  Limoges 
in  1906  to  hear  Guesde  speak  these  memorable  words 
at  the  French  Socialist  Congress:  "Political  action  is 
necessarily  revolutionary.  It  does  not  address  itself  to 
the  employer,  but  to  the  State,  while  industrial  action 
addresses  itself  to  the  individual  employer  or  to  asso- 
ciations of  employers.     Industrial  action  does  not  attack 


268      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

the  employer  as  an  institution,  because  the  employer  is 
the  effect,  the  result  of  capitalist  property.  As  soon  as 
capitalist  property  will  have  disappeared,  the  employer 
will  disappear,  and  not  before.  It  is  in  the  socialist  party 
— because  it  is  a  political  party — that  one  fights  against 
the  employer  class,  and  that  is  why  the  socialist  party  is 
truly  an  economic  party,  tending  to  transform  social  and 
political  economy.  At  the  present  moment  words  have 
their  importance.  And  I  should  like  to  urge  the  comrades 
strongly  never  to  allow  it  to  be  believed  that  trade- 
union  action  is  economic  action.  No ;  this  latter  action  is 
taken  only  by  the  political  organization  of  the  working 
class.  It  is  the  party  of  the  working  class  which  leads 
it — that  is  to  say,  the  socialist  party — because  property  is 
a  social  institution  which  cannot  be  transformed  except 
by  the  exploited  class  making  use  of  political  power  for 
this  purpose.     .     .     . 

"I  realize,"  he  continued,  "that  the  direct-actionists  at- 
tempt to  identify  political  action  with  parliamentary  ac- 
tion. No  ;  electoral  action  as  well  as  parliamentary  action 
may  be  forms;  pieces  of  political  action.  They  are  not 
political  action  as  a  whole,  which  is  the  effort  to  seize 
public  powers — the  Government.  Political  action  is  the 
people  of  Paris  taking  possession  of  the  Hotel  de  Ville  in 
1871.  It  is  the  Parisian  workers  marching  upon  the 
National  Assembly  in  1848.  .  .  .  To  those  who  go 
about  claiming  that  political  action,  as  extolled  by  the 
party,  reduces  itself  to  the  production  of  public  officials, 
you  will  oppose  a  flat  denial.  Political  action  is,  more- 
over, not  the  production  of  laws.  It  is  the  grasping  by 
the  working  class  of  the  manufactory  of  laws;  it  is 
the  political  expropriation  of  the  employer  class,  which 
alone  permits  its  economic  expropriation.  ...  I 
wish  that  someone  would  explain  to  me  how  the  break- 


THE  NEWEST  ANARCHISM  269 

ing  of  street  lights,  the  disemboweling  of  soldiers,  the 
burning  of  factories,  can  constitute  a  means  of  trans- 
forming the  ownership  of  property.  .  .  .  Supposing 
that  the  strikers  were  masters  of  the  streets  and  should 
seize  the  factories,  would  not  the  factories  still  remain 
private  property?  Instead  of  being  the  property  of  a 
few  employers  or  stockholders,  they  would  become  the 
property  of  the  500  or  the  5,000  workingmen  who  had 
taken  them,  and  that  is  all.  The  owners  of  the  property 
will  have  changed;  the  system  of  ownership  will  have 
remained  the  same.  And  ought  we  not  to  consider  it 
necessary  to  say  that  to  the  workers  over  and  over 
again?  Ought  we  to  allow  them  to  take  a  path  that 
leads  nowhere?  .  .  .  No;  the  socialists  could  not, 
without  crime,  lend  themselves  to  such  trickery.  It  is 
our  imperative  duty  to  bring  back  the  workers  to  reality, 
to  remind  them  always  that  one  can  only  be  revolution- 
ary if  one  attacks  the  government  and  the  State."  (45) 
"Trade-union  action  moves  within  the  circle  of  capital- 
ism without  breaking  through  it,  and  that  is  necessarily 
reformist,  in  the  good  sense  of  the  word.  In  order  to 
ameliorate  the  conditions  of  the  victims  of  capitalist 
society,  it  does  not  touch  the  system.  All  the  revolu- 
tionary wrangling  can  avail  nothing  against  this  fact. 
Even  when  a  strike  is  triumphant,  the  day  after  the 
strike  the  wage  earners  remain  wage  earners  and  capi- 
talist exploitation  continues.  It  is  a  necessity,  a  fatal- 
ity, which  trade- union  action  suffers."  (46) 

Any  comment  of  mine  would,  I  think,  only  serve  to 
mar  this  masterly  logic  of  Guesde's.  There  is  nothing 
perhaps  in  socialist  literature  which  so  ably  sustains  the 
traditional  position  of  the  socialist  movement.  The  bat- 
tles in  France  over  this  question  have  been  bitterly 
fought  for  over  half  a  century.     The  most  brilliant  of 


270      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

minds  have  been  engaged  in  the  struggle.  Proudhon, 
Bakounin,  Briand,  Sorel,  Lagardelle,  Berth,  Herve,  are 
men  of  undoubted  ability.  Opposed  to  them  we  find  the 
Marxists,  led  in  these  latter  years  by  Guesde  and  Jaures. 
And  while  direct  action  has  always  been  vigorously 
supported  in  France  both  by  the  intellectuals  and  by  the 
masses,  it  is  the  policy  of  Guesde  and  Jaures  which  has 
made  headway.  At  the  time  when  the  general  strike  was 
looked  upon  as  a  revolutionary  panacea,  and  the  French 
working  class  seemed  on  the  point  of  risking  every- 
thing in  one  throw  of  the  dice,  Jaures  uttered  a  solemn 
warning:  "Toward  this  abyss  .  .  .  the  proletariat 
is  feeling  itself  more  and  more  drawn,  at  the  risk  not 
only  of  ruining  itself  should  it  fall  over,  but  of  drag- 
ging down  with  it  for  years  to  come  either  the  wealth 
or  the  security  of  the  national  life."  (47)  "If  the  pro- 
letarians take  possession  of  the  mine  and  the  factory,  it 
will  be  a  perfectly  fictitious  ownership.  They  will  be 
embracing  a  corpse,  for  the  mines  and  factories  will 
be  no  better  than  dead  bodies  while  economic  circula- 
tion is  suspended  and  production  is  stopped.  So  long  as 
a  class  does  not  own  and  govern  the  whole  social  ma- 
chine, it  can  seize  a  few  factories  and  yards,  if  it  wants 
to,  but  it  really  possesses  nothing.  To  hold  in  one's  hand 
a  few  pebbles  of  a  deserted  road  is  not  to  be  master 
of  transportation."  (48)  "The  working  class  would  be 
the  dupe  of  a  fatal  illusion  and  a  sort  of  unhealthy  ob- 
session if  it  mistook  what  can  be  only  the  tactics  of 
despair  for  a  method  of  revolution."  (49) 

The  struggle,  therefore,  between  the  syndicalists  and 
the  socialists  is,  as  we  see,  the  same  clash  over  methods 
that  occurred  in  the  seventies  and  eighties  between  the 
anarchists  and  the  socialists.  In  abandoning  democ- 
racy, in  denying  the  efficacy  of  political  action,  and  in 


THE  NEWEST  ANARCHISM  271 

resorting  to  methods  which  can  only  end  in  self-destruc- 
tion, the  syndicalist  becomes  the  logical  descendant  of 
the  anarchist.  He  is  at  this  moment  undergoing  an 
evolution  which  appears  to  be  leading  him  into  the  same 
cul-de-sac  that  thwarted  his  forefather.  His  path  is 
blocked  by  the  futility  of  his  own  weapons.  He  is 
fatally  driven,  as  PlechanofT  said,  either  to  serve  the 
bourgeois  politicians  or  to  resort  to  the  tactics  of  Rava- 
chol,  Henry,  Vaillant,  and  Most.  The  latter  is  the 
more  likely,  since  the  masses  refuse  to  be  drawn  into 
the  general  strike  as  they  formerly  declined  to  partici- 
pate in  artificial  uprisings.*  The  daring  conscious  mi- 
nority more  and  more  despair,  and  they  turn  to  the 
only  other  weapon  in  their  arsenal,  that  of  sabotage. 
There  is  a  kind  of  fatality  which  overtakes  the  revolu- 
tionist who  insists  upon  an  immediate,  universal,  and 
violent  revolution.  He  must  first  despair  of  the  major- 
ity. He  then  loses  confidence  even  in  the  enlightened 
minority.  And,  in  the  end,  like  the  Bakouninist,  he  is 
driven  to  individual  acts  of  despair.  What  will  doubt- 
less happen  at  no  distant  date  in  France  and  Italy  will 
be  a  repetition  of  the  congress  at  The  Hague.  When 
the  trade-union  movement  actually  develops  into  a  pow- 
erful organization,  it  will  be  forced  to  throw  off  this 
incubus  of  the  new  anarchism.  It  is  already  thought  that 
a  majority  of  the  French  trade  unionists  oppose  the 
anarchist  tendencies  of  the  clique  in  control,  and  cer- 
tainly  a   number   of   the   largest   and    most   influential 

*  The  committee  on  the  general  strike  of  the  French  Confed- 
eration said  despairingly  in  1900:  "The  idea  of  the  general 
strike  is  sufficiently  understood  to-day.  In  repeatedly  putting 
off  the  date  of  its  coming,  we  risk  discrediting  it  forever  by 
enervating  the  revolutionary  energies."  Quoted  by  Levine,  "The 
Labor  Movement  in  France,"  p.  102. 


272      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

unions  frankly  class  themselves  as  reformist  syndical- 
ists, in  order  to  distinguish  themselves  from  the  revolu- 
tionary syndicalists.  What  will  come  of  this  division 
time  only  can  tell. 

In  any  case,  it  is  becoming  clear  even  to  the  French 
unionists  that  direct  action  is  not  and  cannot  be,  as 
Guesde  has  pointed  out,  revolutionary  action.  It  can- 
not transform  our  social  system.  It  is  destined  to  fail- 
ure just  as  insurrection  as  a  policy  was  destined  to 
failure.  Rittinghausen  said  at  Basel  in  1869:  "Revolu- 
tion, as  a  matter  of  fact,  accomplishes  nothing.  If  you 
are  not  able  to  formulate,  after  the  revolution,  by  legisla- 
tion, your  legitimate  demands,  the  revolution  will  perish 
miserably."  (50)  This  was  true  in  1848,  in  1871,  and 
even  in  the  great  French  Revolution  itself.  Nothing 
would  have  seemed  easier  at  the  time  of  the  French 
Revolution  than  for  the  peasants  to  have  directly  pos- 
sessed themselves  of  the  land.  They  were  using  it.  Their 
houses  were  planted  in  the  midst  of  it.  Their  land- 
lords in  many  cases  had  fled.  Yet  Kropotkin,  in  his 
story  of  "The  Great  French  Revolution,"  relates  that 
the  redistribution  of  land  awaited  the  action  of  Parlia- 
ment. To  be  sure,  some  of  the  peasants  had  taken  the 
land,  but  they  were  not  at  all  sure  that  it  might  not 
again  be  taken  from  them  by  some  superior  force.  Their 
rights  were  not  defined,  and  there  was  such  chaos  in 
the  entire  situation  that,  in  the  end,  the  whole  question 
had  to  be  left  to  Parliament.  It  was  only  after  the 
action  of  the  Convention,  June  11,  1793,  that  the  rights 
of  ownership  were  defined.  It  was  only  then,  as  Kro- 
potkin says,  that  "everyone  had  a  right  to  the  land. 
It  was  a  complete  revolution."  (51)  That  the  greatest 
of  living  anarchists  should  be  forced  to  pay  this  tribute 
to  the  action  of  Parliament  is  in  itself  an  assurance. 


THE  NEWEST  ANARCHISM 


273 


For  masses  in  the  time  of  revolution  to  grab  whatever 
they  desire  is,  after  all,  to  constitute  what  Jaures  calls 
a  fictitious  ownership.  Some  legality  is  needed  to  estab- 
lish posesssion  and  a  sense  of  security,  and,  up  to  the 
present,  only  the  political  institutions  of  society  have 
been  able  to  do  that.  For  this  precise  reason  every 
social  struggle  and  class  struggle  of  the  past  has  been 
a  political  struggle. 

There  remains  but  one  other  fundamental  question, 
which  must  be  briefly  examined.  The  syndicalists  do  not 
go  back  to  Owen  as  the  founder  of  their  philosophy. 
They  constantly  reiterate  the  claim  that  they  alone  to- 
day are  Marxists  and  that  it  is  given  to  them  to  keep 
"pure  and  undefiled"  the  theories  of  that  giant  mind. 
They  base  their  claim  on  the  ground  of  Marx's  economic 
interpretation  of  history  and  especially  upon  his  oft- 
repeated  doctrine  that  upon  the  economic  structure  of 
society  rises  the  juridical  and  political  superstructure. 
They  maintain  that  the  political  institutions  are  merely 
the  reflex  of  economic  conditions.  Alter  the  economic 
basis  of  society,  and  the  political  structure  must  adjust 
itself  to  the  new  conditions.  As  a  result  of  this  truly 
Marxian  reasoning,  they  assert  that  the  revolutionary 
movement  must  pursue  solely  economic  aims  and  disre- 
gard totally  the  existing  and,  to  their  minds,  superfluous 
political  relations.  They  accuse  the  socialists  of  a 
contradiction.  Claiming  to  be  Marxists  and  basing  their 
program  upon  the  economic  interpretation  of  history,  the 
socialists  waste  their  energies  in  trying  to  modify  the 
results  instead  of  obliterating  the  causes.  Political  in- 
stitutions are  parasitical.  Why,  therefore,  ignore  eco- 
nomic foundations  and  waste  effort  remodeling  the 
parasitical  superstructure?  There  is  a  contradiction 
here,  but  not  on  the  part  of  the  socialists.    Proudhon  was 


274 


VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 


entirely  consistent  when  he  asked :  "Can  we  not  ad- 
minister our  goods,  keep  our  accounts,  arrange  our  dif- 
ferences, look  after  our  common  interests?"  (52)  And, 
moreover,  he  was  consistent  when  he  declared :  "I  want 
you  to  make  the  very  institutions  which  I  charge  you 
to  abolish,  ...  so  that  the  new  society  shall  ap- 
pear as  the  spontaneous,  natural,  and  necessary  develop- 
ment of  the  old."  (53)  If  that  were  once  done  the 
dissolution  of  government  would  follow,  as  he  says,  in  a 
way  about  which  one  can  at  present  make  only  guesses. 
But  Proudhon  urged  his  followers  to  establish  coopera- 
tive banks,  cooperative  industries,  and  a  variety  of  vol- 
untary industrial  enterprises,  in  order  eventually  to  pos- 
sess themselves  of  the  means  of  production.  If  the 
working  class,  through  its  own  cooperative  efforts,  could 
once  acquire  the  ownership  of  industry,  if  they  could 
thus  expropriate  the  present  owners  and  gradually  come 
into  the  ownership  of  all  natural  resources  and  all  means 
of  production — in  a  word,  of  all  social  capital — they 
would  not  need  to  bother  themselves  with  the  State.  If, 
in  possessing  themselves  thus  of  all  economic  power,  they 
were  also  to  neglect  the  State,  its  machinery  would,  of 
course,  tumble  into  uselessness  and  eventually  disap- 
pear. As  the  great  capitalists  to-day  make  laws  through 
the  stock  exchange,  through  their  chambers  of  com- 
merce, through  their  pools  and  combinations,  so  the 
working  class  could  do  likewise  if  they  were  in  posses- 
sion of  industry.  But  the  working  class  to-day  has  no 
real  economic  power.  It  has  no  participation  in  the  own- 
ership of  industry.  It  is  claimed  that  it  might  withdraw 
its  labor  power  and  in  this  manner  break  down  the  en- 
tire economic  system.  It  is  urged  that  labor  alone  is  abso- 
lutely necessary  to  production  and  that  if,  in  a  great 
general  strike,  it  should  cease  production,  the  whole  of 


THE  NEWEST  ANARCHISM  275 

society  would  be  forced  to  capitulate.  And  in  theory 
this  seems  unassailable,  but  actually  it  has  no  force 
whatever.  In  the  first  place,  this  economic  power  does 
not  exist  unless  the  workers  are  organized  and  are  prac- 
tically unanimous  in  their  action.  Furthermore,  the 
economic  position  of  the  workers  is  one  of  utter  helpless- 
ness at  the  time  of  a  universal  strike,  in  that  they  can- 
not feed  themselves.  As  they  are  the  nearest  of  all 
classes  to  starvation,  they  will  be  the  first  to  suffer  by  a 
stoppage  of  work.  There  is  still  another  vital  weakness 
in  this  so-called  economic  theory.  The  battles  that  re- 
sult from  a  general  strike  will  not  be  on  the  industrial 
field.  They  will  be  battles  between  the  armed  agents  of 
the  State  and  unarmed  masses  of  hungry  men.  What- 
ever economic  power  the  workers  are  said  to  possess 
would,  in  that  case,  avail  them  little,  for  the  results 
of  their  struggles  would  depend  upon  the  military  power 
which  they  would  be  able  to  manifest.  The  individual 
worker  has  no  economic  power,  nor  has  the  minority, 
and  it  may  even  be  questioned  if  the  withdrawal  of  all 
the  organized  workers  could  bring  society  to  its  knees. 
Multitudes  of  the  small  propertied  classes,  of  farmers, 
of  police,  of  militiamen,  and  of  others  would  immediately 
rush  to  the  defense  of  society  in  the  time  of  such  peril. 
It  is  only  the  working  class  theoretically  conceived  of  as 
a  conscious  unit  and  as  practically  unanimous  in  its 
revolutionary  aims,  in  its  methods,  and  in  its  revolt  which 
can  be  considered  as  the  ultimate  economic  power  of 
modern  society.  The  day  of  such  a  conscious  and  en- 
lightened solidarity  is,  however,  so  far  distant  that 
the  syndicalism  which  is  based  upon  it  falls  of  itself 
into  a  fantastic  dream. 


CHAPTER    XI 

THE     OLDEST     ANARCHISM 

It  is  perhaps % just  as  well  to  begin  this  chapter  by 
reminding  ourselves  that  anarchy  means  literally  no 
government.  Consequently,  there  will  be  no  laws.  "I 
am  ready  to  make  terms,  but  I  will  have  no  laws,"  said 
Proudhon;  adding,  "I  acknowledge  none."  (i)  How- 
ever revolutionary  this  may  seem,  it  is,  after  all,  not 
so  very  unlike  what  has  always  existed  in  the  affairs  of 
men.  Without  the  philosophy  of  the  idealist  anarchist, 
with  no  pretense  of  justice  or  "nonsense"  about  equality, 
there  have  always  been  in  this  old  world  of  ours  those 
powerful  enough  to  make  and  to  break  law,  to  brush 
aside  the  State  and  any  and  every  other  hindrance  that 
stood  in  their  path.  "Laws  are  like  spiders'  webs,"  said 
Anacharsis,  "and  will,  like  them,  only  entangle  and  hold 
the  poor  and  weak,  while  the  rich  and  powerful  will 
easily  break  through  them."  He  might  have  said,  with 
equal  truth,  that,  with  or  without  laws,  the  rich  and 
powerful  have  been  able  in  the  past  to  do  very  much 
as  they  pleased.  For  the  poor  and  the  weak  there  have 
always  been,  to  be  sure,  hard  and  fast  rules  that  they 
could  not  break  through.  But  the  rich  and  powerful  have 
always  managed  to  live  more  or  less  above  the  State  or, 
at  least,  so  to  dominate  the  State  that  to  all  intents  and 
purposes,  other  than  their  own,  it  did  not  exist.  When 
Bakounin  wrote  his  startling  and  now  famous  decree 
abolishing  the  State,  he  created  no  end  of  hilarity  among 

276 


THE  OLDEST  ANARCHISM  277 

the  Marxists,  but  had  Bakounin  been  Napoleon  with 
his  mighty  army,  or  Morgan  and  Rockefeller  with  their 
great  wealth,  he  could  no  doubt  in  some  measure  have 
carried  out  his  wish.  Without,  however,  either  wealth 
or  numbers  behind  him,  Bakounin  preached  a  polity 
that,  up  to  the  present,  only  the  rich  and  powerful  have 
been  able  even  partly  to  achieve.  The  anarchy  of  Prou- 
dhon  was  visionary,  humanitarian,  and  idealistic.  At 
least  he  thought  he  was  striving  for  a  more  humane  so- 
cial order  than  that  of  the  present.  But  this  older  an- 
archism is  as  ancient  as  tyranny,  and  never  at  any  mo- 
ment has  it  ceased  to  menace  human  civilization.  Based 
on  a  real  mastery  over  the  industrial  and  political  insti- 
tutions of  mankind,  this  actual  anarchy  has  never  for 
long  allowed  the  law,  the  Constitution,  the  State,  or  the 
flag  to  obstruct  its  path  or  thwart  its  avarice. 

Moreover,  under  the  anarchism  proposed  by  Proudhon 
and  Bakounin,  the  maintenance  of  property  rights,  public 
order,  and  personal  security  would  be  left  to  voluntary 
effort,  that  is  to  say,  to  private  enterprise.  As  all  things 
would  be  decided  by  mutual  agreement,  the  only  law 
would  be  a  law  of  contracts,  and  that  law  would  need 
to  be  enforced  either  by  associations  formed  for  that 
purpose  or  by  professionals  privately  employed  for  that 
purpose.  So  far  as  one  can  see,  then,  the  methods  of 
the  feudal  lords  would  be  revived,  by  which  they  hired 
their  own  personal  armies  or  went  shares  in  the  spoils 
with  their  bandits,  buccaneers,  and  assassins.  By  organ- 
izing their  own  military  forces  and  maintaining  them  in 
comfort,  they  were  able  to  rob,  burn,  and  murder,  in 
order  to  protect  the  wealth  and  power  they  had,  or  to 
gain  more  wealth  and  power.  For  them  there  was  no 
law  but  that  of  a  superior  fighting  force.  There  was 
an  infinite  variety  of  customs  and  traditions  that  were 


278      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMEM  1 

in  the  nature  of  laws,  but  even  these  were  seldom  al- 
lowed to  stand  in  the  way  of  those  who  coveted,  and 
were  strong  enough  to  take,  the  land,  the  money,  or  the 
produce  of  others.  Indeed,  the  feudal  duke  or  prince 
was  all  that  NechayefT  claimed  for  the  modern  robber. 
He  was  a  glorified  anarchist,  "without  phrase,  without 
rhetoric."  He  could  scour  Europe  for  mercenaries,  and, 
when  he  possessed  himself  of  an  army  of  marauders,  he 
became  a  law  unto  himself.  The  most  ancient  and  hon- 
orable anarchy  is  despotism,  and  its  most  effective  and 
available  means  of  domination  have  always  been  the  em- 
ployment of  its  own  personal  military  forces. 

It  will  be  remembered  that  Bakounin  developed  a 
kind  of  robber  worship.  The  bandit  leaders  Stenka 
Razin  and  PougatchofF  appeared  to  him  as  national 
heroes,  popular  avengers,  and  irreconcilable  enemies  of 
the  .State.  He  conceived  of  the  brigands  scattered 
throughout  Russia  and  confined  in  the  prisons  of  the 
Empire  as  "a  unique  and  indivisible  world,  strongly 
bound  together — the  world  of  the  Russian  revolution." 
The  robber  was  "the  wrestler  in  life  and  in  death  against 
all  this  civilization  of  officials,  of  nobles,  of  priests,  and 
of  the  crown."  Of  course,  Bakounin  says  here  much  that 
is  historically  true.  Thieves,  marauders,  highwaymen, 
bandits,  brigands,  villains,  mendicants,  and  all  those  other 
elements  of  mediaeval  life  for  whom  society  provided 
neither  land  nor  occupation,  often  organized  themselves 
into  guerilla  bands  in  order  to  war  upon  all  social  and 
civil  order.  But  Bakounin  neglects  to  mention  that  it 
was  these  very  elements  that  eagerly  became  the  mercen- 
aries of  any  prince  who  could  feed  them.  They  were 
lawless,  "without  phrase,  without  rhetoric,"  and,  if  any- 
one were  willing  to  pay  them,  they  would  gladly  pillage, 
burn,  and   murder   in  his  interest.     They  would   have 


THE  OLDEST  ANARCHISM  279 

served  anybody  or  anything — the  State,  society,  a  prince, 
or  a  tyrant.  They  had  no  scruples  and  no  philosophies. 
They  were  in  the  market  to  be  bought  by  anyone  who 
wanted  a  choice  brand  of  assassins.  And  the  feudal 
duke  or  prince  bought,  fed,  and  cared  for  these  "veritable 
and  unique  revolutionists,"  in  order  to  have  them  ready 
for  service  in  his  work  of  robbery  and  murder.  To 
be  sure,  when  these  marauders  had  no  employer  they 
were  dangerous,  because  then  they'committed  crimes  and 
outrages  on  their  own  hook.  But  the  vast  majority  of 
them  were  hirelings,  and  many  of  them  achieved  fame 
for  the  bravery  of  their  exploits  in  the  service  of  the 
dukes,  the  princes,  and  the  priests  of  that  time.  There 
were  even  guilds  of  mercenaries,  such  as  the  Condottieri 
of  Italy ;  and  the  Swiss  were  famous  for  their  superior 
service.  They  were,  it  seems,  revolutionists  in  Bakou- 
nin's  use  of  the  term,  and  every  prince  knew  "no  money, 
no  Swiss"   {"point  d 'argent,  point  de  Suisse"). 

A  very  slight  acquaintance  with  history  teaches  us 
that  this  anarchy  has  been  checked  and  that  the  history 
of  recent  times  consists  largely  of  the  struggles  of  the 
masses  to  harness  and  subdue  this  anarchy  of  the  pow- 
erful. And  perhaps  the  most  notable  step  in  that  direction 
was  that  development  of  the  State  which  took  away 
the  right  of  the  nobles  to  employ  and  maintain  their 
own  private  armies.  In  England,  policing  by  the  State 
began  as  late  as  1826,  when  Sir  Robert  Peel  passed  the 
law  establishing  the  Metropolitan  force  in  London,  and 
these  agents  of  order  are  even  now  called  "Bobbies"  and 
"Peelers,"  in  memory  of  him.  Throughout  all  Europe 
the  military,  naval,  and  police  forces  are  to-day  in  the 
hands  of  the  State.  We  have,  then,  in  contradistinction 
to  the  old  anarchy,  the  State  maintenance  of  law  and 
order,  and  of  protection  to  life  and  property.     Even  in 


•28o      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

Russia  the  coercive  forces  are  under  the  control  of  the 
Government,  and  nowhere  are  individuals — be  they 
Grand  Dukes  or  Princes — allowed  to  employ  their  own 
military  forces.  When  trouble  arises  without,  it  is  the 
State  that  calls  together  its  armed  men  for  aggression 
or  for  defense.  When  trouble  arises  within — such  as 
strikes,  riots,  and  insurrections — it  is  the  State  that  is 
supposed  to  deal  with  them.  Individuals,  no  matter  how 
powerful,  are  not  to-day  permitted  to  organize  armies 
to  invade  a  foreign  land,  to  subdue  its  people,  and  to 
wrest  from  them  their  property.  In  the  case  of  upris- 
ings within  a  country,  the  individual  is  not  allowed  to 
raise  his  armies,  subdue  the  troublesome  elements,  and 
make  himself  master.  Within  the  last  few  centuries  the 
State  has  thus  gradually  drawn  to  itself  the  powers  of 
repression,  of  coercion,  and  of  aggression,  and  it  is  the 
State  alone  that  is  to-day  allowed  to  maintain  military 
forces. 

At  any  rate,  this  is  true  of  all  civilized  countries 
except  the  United  States.  This  is  the  only  modern  State 
wherein  coercive  military  powers  are  still  wielded  by  in- 
dividuals. In  the  United  States  it  is  still  possible  for  rich 
and  powerful  individuals  or  for  corporations  to  employ 
their  own  bands  of  armed  men.  If  any  legislator  were 
to  propose  a  law  allowing  any  man  or  group  of  men  to 
have  their  own  private  battleships  and  to  organize  their 
own  private  navies  and  armies,  or  if  anyone  suggested 
the  turning  over  of  the  coercive  powers  of  the  State  to 
private  enterprise,  the  masses  would  rise  in  rebellion 
against  the  project.  No  congressman  would,  of  course, 
venture  to  suggest  such  a  law,  and  few  individuals  would 
undertake  to  defend  such  a  plan.  Yet  the  fact  is  that 
now,  without  legal  authority,  private  armies  may  be  em- 
ployed and  are  indeed  actually  employed  in  the  United 


THE  OLDEST  ANARCHISM  281 

States.  In  the  most  stealthy  and  insidious  manner  there 
has  grown  up  within  the  last  fifty  years  an  extensive  and 
profitable  commerce  for  supplying  to  the  lords  of  finance 
their  own  private  police.  And  the  strange  fact  appears 
that  the  newest,  and  supposedly  the  least  feudal,  country 
is  to-day  the  only  country  that  allows  the  oldest  anar- 
chists to  keep  in  their  hands  the  power  to  arm  their  own 
mercenaries  and,  in  the  words  of  an  eminent  Justice,  to 
expose  "the  lives  of  citizens  to  the  murderous  assaults 
of  hireling  assassins."  (2)  It  is  with  these  "hireling 
assassins,"  who,  for  the  convenience  of  the  wealthy,  are 
now  supplied  by  a  great  network  of  agencies,  that  we 
shall  chiefly  concern  ourselves  in  this  chapter.  We  must 
here  leave  Europe,  since  it  is  in  the  United  States  alone 
that  the  workings  of  this  barbarous  commerce  in  anarchy 
can  be  observed. 

Robert  A.  Pinkerton  was  the  originator  of  a  system  of 
extra-legal  police  agents  that  has  gradually  grown  to  be 
one  of  the  chief  commercial  enterprises  of  the  country. 
According  to  his  own  testimony,  (3)  he  began  in  1866 
to  supply  armed  men  to  the  owners  of  large  industries, 
and  ever  since  his  firm  has  carried  on  a  profitable  busi- 
ness in  that  field.    Envious  of  his  prosperity,  other  indi- 
viduals have   formed   rival  agencies,   and  to-day  there 
exist  in  the  United  States  thousands  of  so-called  detec- 
tive bureaus  where  armed  men  can  be  employed  to  do 
the  bidding  of  any  wealthy  individual.    While,  no  doubt, 
there  are  agencies  that  conduct  a  thoroughly  legitimate 
business,  there  are  unquestionably  numerous  agencies  in 
this  country  where  one  may  employ  thugs,  thieves,  in- 
cendiaries, dynamiters,  perjurers,  jury-fixers,  manufac- 
turers of  evidence,  strike-breakers  and  murderers.     A 
regularly  established  commerce  exists,  which  enables  a 
rich  man,  without  great  difficulty  or  peril,  to  hire  aban- 


282      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

doned  criminals,  who,  for  certain  prices,  will  undertake 
to  execute  any  crime.  If  one  can  afford  it,  one  may  have 
always  at  hand  a  body  of  highwaymen  or  a  small  private 
army.  Such  a  commerce  as  this  was  no  doubt  necessary 
and  proper  in  the  Middle  Ages  and  would  no  doubt  be 
necessary  and  proper  in  a  state  of  anarchy,  but  when 
individuals  are  allowed  to  employ  private  police,  armies, 
thugs,  and  assassins  in  a  country  which  possesses  a  regu- 
larly established  State,  courts,  laws,  military  forces,  and 
police  the  traffic  constitutes  a  menace  as  alarming  as  the 
Black  Hand,  the  Camorra,  or  the  Mafia.  The  story  of 
these  hired  terrorists  and  of  this  ancient  anarchy  revived 
surpasses  in  cold-blooded  criminality  any  other  thing 
known  in  modern  history.  That  rich  and  powerful 
patrons  should  be  allowed  to  purchase  in  the  market  poor 
and  desperate  criminals  eager  to  commit  any  crime  on 
the  calendar  for  a  few  dollars,  is  one  of  the  most  amaz- 
ing and  incredible  anachronisms  of  a  too  self-complaisant 
Republic. 

For  some  reason  not  wholly  obscure  the  American 
people  generally  have  been  kept  in  such  ignorance  of 
the  facts  of  this  commerce  that  few  even  dream  that 
it  exists.  And  I  am  fully  conscious  of  the  need  for  proof 
in  support  of  what  to  many  must  appear  to  be  unwar- 
ranted assertions.  Indeed,  it  is  rare  to  find  anyone  who 
suspects  the  character  of  the  private  detective.  The 
general  impression  seems  to  be  that  he  performs  a  very 
useful  and  necessary  service,  that  the  profession  is  an 
honorable  one,  and  that  the  mass  of  detectives  have  only 
one  ambition  in  life,  and  that  is  to  ferret  out  the  crim- 
inal and  to  bring  him  to  justice.  To  denounce  detectives 
as  a  class  appears  to  most  persons  as  absurdly  unreason- 
able. To  speak  of  them  with  contempt  is  to  convey  the 
impression  that  detectives  stand  in  the  way  of  some  evil 


THE  OLDEST  ANARCHISM  283 

schemes  of  their  detractor.  Fiction  of  a  peculiarly- 
American  sort  has  built  up  among  the  people  an  exalted 
conception  of  the  sleuth.  And  it  must  appear  with 
rather  a  shock  to  those  persons  who  have  thus  idealized 
the  detective  to  learn  that  thousands  of  men  who  have 
been  in  the  penitentiaries  are  constantly  in  the  employ 
of  the  detective  agencies.  In  a  society  which  makes  it 
almost  impossible  for  an  ex-convict  to  earn  an  honorable 
living  it  is  no  wonder  that  many  of  them  grasp  eagerly 
at  positions  offered  them  as  "strike-breakers"  and  as 
"special  officers."  The  first  and  most  important  thing, 
then,  in  this  chapter  is  to  prove,  with  perhaps  undue  de- 
tail, the  ancient  saying  that  "you  must  be  a  thief  to  catch 
a  thief,"  and  that  possibly  for  that  proverbial  reason 
many  private  detectives  are  schooled  and  practiced  in 
crime. 

So  far  as  I  know,  the  first  serious  attempt  to  inform 
the  general  public  of  the  real  character  of  American  de- 
tectives and  to  tell  of  their  extensive  traffic  in  criminality 
was  made  by  a  British  detective,  who,  after  having  been 
stationed  in  America  for  several  years,  was  impelled 
to  make  public  the  alarming  conditions  which  he  found. 
This  was  Thomas  Beet,  the  American  representative  of 
the  famous  John  Conquest,  ex-Chief  Inspector  of  Scot- 
land Yard,  who,  in  a  public  statement,  declared  his  as- 
tonishment that  "few  .  .  .  recognize  in  them  [de- 
tective agencies]  an  evil  which  is  rapidly  becoming  a  vital 
menace  to  American  society.  Ostensibly  conducted  for 
the  repression  and  punishment  of  crime,  they  are  in  fact 
veritable  hotbeds  of  corruption,  trafficking  upon  the  honor 
and  sacred  confidences  of  their  patrons  and  the  credulity 
of  the  public,  and  leaving  in  their  wake  an  aftermath  of 
disgrace,  disaster,  and  even  death."  (4)  He  pointed  out 
the  odium  that  must  inevitably  attach  itself  to  the  very 


284      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

name  "private  detective,"  unless  society  awakens  and 
protects  in  some  manner  the  honest  members  of  the  pro- 
fession. "It  may  seem  a  sweeping  statement,"  he  says, 
"but  I  am  morally  convinced  that  fully  ninety  per  cent, 
of  the  private  detective  establishments,  masquerading  in 
whatever  form,  are  rotten  to  the  core  and  simply  exist 
and  thrive  upon  a  foundation  of  dishonesty,  deceit,  con- 
spiracy, and  treachery  to  the  public  in  general  and  their 
own  patrons  in  particular."  (5) 

The  statements  of  Thomas  Beet  are,  however,  not  all 
of  this  general  character,  and  he  specifically  says:  "I 
know  that  there  are  detectives  at  the  head  of  prominent 
agencies  in  this  country  whose  pictures  adorn  the  rogues' 
gallery ;  men  who  have  served  time  in  various  prisons 
for  almost  every  crime  on  the  calendar.  .  .  .  Thugs 
and  thieves  and  criminals  don  the  badge  and  outward 
semblance  of  the  honest  private  detective  in  order  that 
they  may  prey  upon  society.  .  .  .  Private  detectives 
such  as  I  have  described  do  not,  as  a  usual  thing,  go  out 
to  learn  facts,  but  rather  to  make,  at  all  costs,  the  evi- 
dence desired  by  the  patron."  (6)  He  shows  the  meth- 
ods of  trickery  and  deceit  by  which  these  detectives 
blackmail  the  wealthy,  and  the  various  means  they  em- 
ploy for  convicting  any  man,  no  matter  how  innocent,  of 
any  crime.  "We  shudder  when  we  hear  of  the  system 
of  espionage  maintained  in  Russia,"  he  adds,  "while  in 
the  great  American  cities,  unnoticed,  are  organizations  of 
spies  and  informers."  (7)  It  is  interesting  to  get  the 
views  of  an  impartial  and  expert  observer  upon  this 
rapidly  growing  commerce  in  espionage,  blackmail,  and 
assault,  and  no  less  interesting  is  the  opinion  of  the  most 
notable  American  detective,  William  J.  Burns,  on  the 
character  of  these  men.  Speaking  of  detectives  he  de- 
clared that,  "as  a  class,  they  are  the  biggest  lot  of  black- 


THE  OLDEST  ANARCHISM  285 

mailing  thieves  that  ever  went  un whipped  of  justice."  (8) 
Only  a  short  time  before  Burns  made  this  remark  the 
late  Magistrate  Henry  Steinert,  according  to  reports  in 
the  New  York  press,  grew  very  indignant  in  his  court 
over  the  shooting  of  a  young  lad  by  these  private  offi- 
cers. "I  think  it  an  outrage,"  he  declared,  "that  the 
Police  Commissioner  is  enabled  to  furnish  police  power 
to  these  special  officers,  many  of  them  thugs,  men  out 
of  work,  some  of  whom  would  commit  murder  for  two 
dollars.  Most  of  the  arrests  which  have  been  made  by 
these  men  have  been  absolutely  unwarranted.  In  nearly 
every  case  one  of  these  special  officers  had  first  pushed 
a  gun  into  the  prisoner's  face.  The  shooting  last  night 
when  a  boy  was  killed  shows  the  result  of  giving  power 
to  such  men.  It  is  a  shame  and  a  disgrace  to  the  Police 
Department  of  the  city  that  such  conditions  are  allowed 
to  exist."  (9) 

Anyone  who  will  take  the  time  to  search  through  the 
testimony  gathered  by  various  governmental  commis- 
sions will  find  an  abundance  of  evidence  indicating  that 
many  of  these  special  officers  and  private  detectives  are 
in  reality  thugs  and  criminals.  As  long  ago  as  1892  an 
inquiry  was  made  into  the  character  of  the  men  who 
were  sent  to  deal  with  a  strike  at  Homestead,  Pennsyl- 
vania. A  well-known  witness  testified:  "We  find  that 
one  is  accused  of  wife-murder,  four  of  burglary,  two  of 
wife-beating,  and  one  of  arson."  (10)  A  thoroughly 
reliable  and  responsible  detective,  who  had  been  in  the 
United  States  secret  service,  also  gave  damaging  testi- 
mony. "They  were  the  scum  of  the  earth.  .  .  .  There 
is  not  one  out  of  ten  that  would  not  commit  mur- 
der; that  you  could  not  hire  him  to  commit  murder 
or  any  other  crime."  Furthermore,  he  declared,  "I  would 
not  believe  any  detective  under  oath  without  his  evidence 


286      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

was  corroborated."  He  spoke  of  ex-convicts  being  em- 
ployed, and  alleged  that  the  manager  of  one  of  the  large 
agencies  "was  run  out  of  Cincinnati  for  blackmail."  (n) 
Similar  statements  were  made  by  another  detective, 
named  Le  Vin,  to  the  Industrial  Commission  of  the 
United  States  when  it  was  investigating  the  Chicago  labor 
troubles  of  1900.  He  declared  that  the  Contractors'  As- 
sociation of  Chicago  had  come  to  him  repeatedly  to  em- 
ploy sluggers,  and  that  on  one  occasion  the  employers 
had  told  him  to  put  Winchesters  in  the  hands  of  his 
men  and  to  manage  somehow  to  get  into  a  fight  with 
the  pickets  and  the  strikers.  The  Commission,  evidently 
surprised  at  this  testimony,  asked  Mr.  Le  Vin  whether 
it  was  possible  to  hire  detectives  to  beat  up  men.  His 
answer  was :  "You  cannot  hire  every  man  to  do  it." 
"O.  'But  can  they  hire  men?'  A.  'Yes,  they  could  hire 
men.' 

"Q.  'From  other  private  detective  agencies?'  A. 
'Unfortunately,  from  some,  yes.'"   (12) 

In  the  hearing  before  a  Subcommittee  of  the  Commit- 
tee on  the  Judiciary,  United  States  Senate,  August  13, 
1912,  lengthy  testimony  was  given  concerning  a  series  of 
two  hundred  assaults  that  had  been  made  upon  the  union 
molders  of  Milwaukee  during  a  strike  in  1906.  One  of 
the  leaders  of  the  union  was  killed,  while  others  were 
brutally  attacked  by  thugs  in  the  employ  of  a  Chicago 
detective  agency.  A  serious  investigation  was  begun  by 
Attorney  W.  B.  Rubin,  acting  for  the  Molders'  Union, 
and  in  court  the  evidence  clearly  proved  that  the  Chicago 
detective  agency  employed  ex-convicts  and  other  criminals 
for  the  purposes  of  slugging,  shooting,  and  even  killing 
union  men.  When  some  of  these  detectives  were  ar- 
rested they  testified  that  they  had  acted  under  strict  in- 
structions.    They  had  been  sent  out  to  beat  up  certain 


THE  OLDEST  ANARCHISM  287 

men.  Sometimes  these  men  were  pointed  out  to  them, 
at  other  times  they  were  given  the  names  of  the  men  that 
were  to  be  slugged.  They  told  the  amounts  that  they  had 
been  paid,  of  the  lead  pipe,  two  feet  long,  which  they 
had  used  for  the  assault,  and  of  the  fact  that  they  were 
all  armed.  There  was  also  testimony  given  that  nearly 
twenty-two  thousand  dollars  had  been  paid  by  one  firm  to 
this  one  detective  agency  for  services  of  this  character. 
It  was  also  shown  that  immediately  after  the  assaults 
were  committed  the  thugs  were,  if  possible,  shipped  out 
of  town  for  a  few  days;  but,  if  they  were  arrested, 
they  were  defended  by  able  attorneys  and  their  fines 
paid.  Although  many  assaults  were  committed  where 
no  arrests  could  be  made,  over  forty  "detectives"  were 
actually  arrested,  and,  when  brought  into  court,  were 
found  guilty  of  crimes  ranging  from  disturbing  the  peace 
and  carrying  concealed  weapons  to  aggravated  assault 
and  shooting  with  intent  to  kill.  Manv  of  these  detec- 
tives  convicted  in  Milwaukee  had  been  previously  con- 
victed of  similar  crimes  committed  in  other  cities.  Al- 
though some  of  them  had  long  criminal  records,  they 
were,  nevertheless,  regularly  in  the  employ  of  the  detec- 
tive agency.  It  appeared  in  one  trial  that  one  of  the  men 
employed  was  very  much  incensed  when  he  saw  three  of 
his  associates  attack  a  union  molder  with  clubs,  knock- 
ing him  down  and  beating  him  severely.  With  indigna- 
tion he  protested  against  the  outrage.  When  the  head 
of  the  agency  heard  of  this  the  man  was  discharged. 
The  court  records  also  show  that  the  head  of  the  detec- 
tive agency  had  gone  himself  to  Chicago  to  secure  two 
men  to  undertake  what  proved  to  be  a  fatal  assault  upon 
a  trade-union  leader  named  Peter  J.  Cramer.  When 
arrested  and  brought  into  court  they  testified  that  they 
received  twenty  dollars  per  clay  for  their  services. 


288       VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

Equally  direct  and  positive  evidence  concerning  the 
character  of  the  men  supplied  by  detective  agencies  for 
strike-breaking  and  other  purposes  is  found  in  the  annual 
report  of  the  Chicago  &  Great  Western  Railway  for  the 
period  ending  in  the  spring  of  the  year  1908.  "To  man 
the  shops  and  roundhouses,"  says  the  report,  "the  com- 
pany was  compelled  to  resort  to  professional  strike- 
breakers, a  class  of  men  who  are  willing  to  work  during 
the  excitement  and  dangers  of  personal  injury  which  at- 
tend strikes,  but  who  refuse  to  work  longer  than  the 
excitement  and  dangers  last.  .  .  .  Perhaps  ten  per 
cent,  of  the  first  lot  of  strike-breakers  were  fairly  good 
mechanics,  but  fully  90  per  cent,  knew  nothing  about 
machinery,  and  had  to  be  gotten  rid  of.  To  get  rid  of 
such  men,  however,  is  easier  said  than  done. 

"The  first  batch  which  was  discharged,  consisting  of 
about  100  men,  refused  to  leave  the  barricade,  made 
themselves  a  barricade  within  the  company's  barricade, 
and,  producing  guns  and  knives,  refused  to  budge.  The 
company's  fighting  men,  after  a  day  or  two,  forced  them 
out  of  the  barricade  and  into  a  special  train,  which  car- 
ried them  under  guard  to  Chicago."  Here  was  one  gang 
of  hired  criminals,  "the  company's  fighting  men,"  called 
into  service  to  fight  another  gang,  the  company's  strike- 
breakers. The  character  of  these  "detectives,"  as  testified 
to  in  this  case  by  the  employers,  appears  to  have  been 
about  the  same  as  that  of  those  described  by  "Kid"  Ho- 
gan,  who,  after  an  experience  as  a  strike-breaker,  told 
the  New  York  Sunday  World:  "There  was  the  finest 
bunch  of  crooks  and  grafters  working  as  strike-breakers 
in  those  American  Express  Company  strikes  you  would 
ever  want  to  see.  I  was  one  of  'em  and  know  what  I 
am  talking  about.  That  gang  of  grafters  cost  the  Express 
Company  a  pile  of  money.     Why,  they  used  to  start 


THE  OLDEST  ANARCHISM  289 

trouble  themselves  just  to  keep  their  jobs  a-going  and  to 
get  a  chance  to  swipe  stuff  off  the  wagons. 

"It  was  the  same  way  down  at  Philadelphia  on  the 
street  car  strike.  Those  strike-breakers  used  to  get  a 
car  out  somewhere  in  the  suburbs  and  then  get  off  and 
smash  up  the  windows,  tip  the  car  over,  and  put  up  an 
awful  holler  about  being  attacked  by  strikers,  just  so 
they'd  have  to  be  kept  on  the  job."  (13) 

Thus  we  see  that  some  American  "detective"  agencies 
have  many  and  varied  trades.  But  they  not  only  sup- 
1  )ly  strike-breakers,  perjurers,  spies,  and  even  assassins, 
they  have  also  been  successful  in  making  an  utter  farce 
of  trial  by  jury.  It  appears  that  even  some  of  the  best 
known  American  detectives  are  not  above  the  packing 
of  a  jury.  At  least,  such  was  the  startling  charge  made 
by  Attorney-General  George  W.  Wickersham,  May  10, 
1912.  In  the  report  to  President  Taft  Mr.  Wickersham 
accused  the  head  of  one  of  the  chief  detective  agencies 
of  the  country  of  fixing  a  jury  in  California.  The  agents 
of  this  detective,  with  the  cooperation  of  the  clerk  of  the 
court,  investigated  the  names  of  proposed  jurors.  In 
order  to  be  sure  of  getting  a  jury  that  would  convict, 
the  record  of  each  individual  was  carefully  gone  into 
and  a  report  handed  to  the  prosecuting  attorneys.  Some 
of  the  comments  on  the  jurors  follow :  "Convictor 
from  the  word  go."  "Socialist.  Anti-Mitchell."  "Con- 
victor  from  the  word  go;  just  read  the  indictment.  Pop- 
ulist." "Think  he  is  a  Populist.  If  so,  convictor.  Good, 
reliable  man."  "Convictor.  Democrat.  Hates  Her- 
mann." "Hidebound  Democrat.  Not  apt  to  see  any  good 
in  a  Republican."  "Would  be  apt  to  be  for  conviction." 
"He  is  apt  to  wish  Mitchell  hung.  Think  he  would  be 
a  fair  juror."  "Would  be  likely  to  convict  any  Republi- 
can politician."     "Convictor."     "Would  convict  Christ." 


290      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

"Convict  Christ.  Populist."  "Convict  anyone.  Demo- 
crat." (14)  This  great  detective  even  had  the  audacity, 
it  seems,  to  telegraph  William  Scott  Smith,  at  that  time 
secretary  to  the  Hon.  E.  A.  Hitchcock,  the  Secretary  of 
the  Interior :  "Jury  commissioners  cleaned  out  old  box 
from  which  trial  jurors  were  selected  and  put  in  600 
names,  every  one  of  which  was  investigated  before  they 
were  placed  in  the  box.  This  confidential."  (15)  It  is 
impossible  to  reproduce  here  some  of  the  language  of 
this  great  detective.  The  foul  manner  in  which  he 
comments  upon  the  character  of  the  jurors  is  altogether 
worthy  of  his  vocation.  That,  however,  is  unimportant 
compared  to  the  more  serious  fact  that  a  well-paid  de- 
tective can  so  pervert  trial  by  jury  that  it  would  "con- 
vict Christ." 

I  shall  be  excused  in  a  matter  so  devastating  to  re- 
publican institutions  as  this  if  I  quote  further  from  the 
disclosures  of  Thomas  Beet :  "There  is  another  phase," 
he  says,  "of  the  private  detective  evil  which  has  worked 
untold  damage  in  America.  This  is  the  private  con- 
stabulary system  by  which  armed  forces  are  employed 
during  labor  troubles.  It  is  a  condition  akin  to  the  feudal 
system  of  warfare,  when  private  interests  can  employ 
troops  of  mercenaries  to  wage  war  at  their  command. 
Ostensibly,  these  armed  private  detectives  are  hurried  to 
the  scene  of  the  trouble  to  maintain  order  and  prevent 
destruction  of  property,  although  this  work  always  should 
be  left  to  the  official  guardians  of  the  peace.  That  there 
is  a  sinister  motive  back  of  the  employment  of  these  men 
has  been  shown  time  and  again.  Have  you  ever  followed 
the  episodes  of  a  great  strike  and  noticed  that  most  of 
the  disorderly  outbreaks  were  so  guided  as  to  work  harm 
to  the  interests  of  the  strikers?  .  .  .  Private  detec- 
tives, unsuspected   in   their  guise   of  workmen,  mingle 


THE  OLDEST  ANARCHISM  291 

with  the  strikers  and  by  incendiary  talk  or  action  some- 
times stir  them  up  to  violence.  When  the  workmen  will 
not  participate,  it  is  an  easy  matter  to  stir  up  the  dis- 
orderly faction  which  is  invariably  attracted  by  a  strike, 
although  it  has  no  connection  therewith. 

"During  a  famous  strike  of  car  builders  in  a  western 
city  some  years  ago,  ...  to  my  knowledge  much 
of  the  lawlessness  was  incited  by  private  detectives,  who 
led  mobs  in  the  destruction  of  property.  In  one  of  the 
greatest  of  our  strikes,  that  involving  the  steel  industry, 
over  two  thousand  armed  detectives  were  employed  sup- 
posedly to  protect  property,  while  several  hundred  more 
were  scattered  in  the  ranks  of  strikers  as  workmen. 
Many  of  the  latter  became  officers  in  the  labor  bodies, 
helped  to  make  laws  for  the  organizations,  made  incen- 
diary speeches,  cast  their  votes  for  the  most  radical 
movements  made  by  the  strikers,  participated  in  and  led 
bodies  of  the  members  in  the  acts  of  lawlessness  that 
eventually  caused  the  sending  of  State  troops  and  the 
declaration  of  martial  law.  While  doing  this,  these  spies 
within  the  ranks  were  making  daily  reports  of  the  plans 
and  purposes  of  the  strikers.  To  my  knowledge,  when 
lawlessness  was  at  its  height  and  murder  ran  riot,  these 
men  wore  little  patches  of  white  on  the  lapels  of  their 
coats  that  their  fellow  detectives  of  the  'two  thousand' 
would  not  shoot  them  down  by  mistake.  .  .  .  In  no 
other  country  in  the  world,  with  the  exception  of  China, 
is  it  possible  for  an  individual  to  surround  himself  with 
a  standing  army  to  do  his  bidding  in  defiance  of  law  and 
order."  (16) 

That  the  assertions  of  Thomas  Beet  are  well  founded 
can,  I  think,  be  made  perfectly  clear  by  three  tragic  pe- 
riods in  the  history  of  labor  disputes  in  America.  At 
Homestead  in  1892,  in  the  railway  strikes  of  1894,  and 


292      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

in  Colorado  during  the  labor  wars  of  1903-1904  detectives 
were  employed  on  a  large  scale.  For  reasons  of  space  I 
shall  limit  myself  largely  to  these  cases,  which,  without 
exaggeration,  are  typical  of  conditions  which  constantly 
arise  in  the  United  States.  Within  the  last  year  West 
Virginia  has  been  added  to  the  list.  Incredible  outrages 
have  been  committed  there  by  the  mine  guards.  They 
have  deliberately  murdered  men  in  some  cases,  and,  on 
one  dark  night  in  February  last,  they  sent  an  armored 
train  into  Holly  Grove  and  opened  fire  with  machine  guns 
upon  a  sleeping  village  of  miners.  They  have  beaten, 
clubbed,  and  stabbed  men  and  women  in  the  effort  either 
to  infuriate  them  into  open  war,  or  to  reduce  them  to 
abject  slavery.  Unfortunately,  at  this  time  the  complete 
report  of  the  Senate  investigation  has  not  been  issued, 
and  it  seems  better  to  confine  these  pages  to  those  facts 
only  that  careful  inquiry  has  proved  unquestionable.  We 
are  fortunate  in  having  the  reports  of  public  officials — 
certainly  unbiased  on  the  side  of  labor — to  rely  upon 
for  the  facts  concerning  the  use  of  thugs  and  hirelings 
in  Pennsylvania,  Illinois,  and  Colorado  during  three  ter- 
rible battles  between  capital  and  labor. 

The  story  of  the  shooting  of  Henry  C.  Frick  by  Alex- 
ander Berkman  is  briefly  referred  to  in  the  first  chapter, 
but  the  events  which  led  up  to  that  shooting  have  well- 
nigh  been  forgotten.  Certainly,  nothing  could  have 
created  more  bitterness  among  the  working  classes  than 
the  act  of  the  Carnegie  Steel  Company  when  it  ordered 
a  detective  agency  to  send  to  Homestead  three  hundred 
men  armed  with  Winchester  rifles.  There  was  the  pros- 
pect of  a  strike,  and  it  appears  that  the  management 
was  in  no  mood  to  parley  with  its  employees,  and  that 
nineteen  days  before  any  trouble  occurred  the  Carnegie 
Steel  Company  opened  negotiations  for  the  employment 


THE  OLDEST  ANARCHISM  293 

of  a  private  army.  It  had  been  the  custom  of  the  Carne- 
gie Company  to  meet  the  representatives  of  the  Almaga- 
mated  Association  of  Iron  and  Steel  Workers  from  time 
to  time  and  at  these  conferences  to  agree  upon  wages. 
On  June  30,  1892,  the  agreement  expired,  and  previous 
to  that  date  the  Company  announced  a  reduction  of 
wages,  declaring  that  the  new  scale  would  terminate  in 
January  instead  of  June.  The  employees  rejected  the 
proposed  terms,  principally  on  the  ground  that  they  could 
not  afford  to  strike  in  midwinter  and  in  that  case  they 
would  not  be  able  to  resist  a  further  reduction  in  wages. 
Upon  receiving  this  statement  the  company  locked  out  its 
employees  and  the  battle  began. 

The  steel  works  were  surrounded  by  a  fence  three 
miles  long,  fifteen  feet  in  height,  and  covered  with  barbed 
wire.  It  was  called  "Fort  Frick,"  and  the  three  hundred 
detectives  were  to  be  brought  down  the  river  by  boat  and 
landed  in  the  fort.  Morris  Hillquit  gives  the  following 
account  of  the  pitched  battle  that  occurred  in  the  early 
morning  hours  of  July  6:  "As  soon  as  the  boat  carrying 
the  Pinkertons  was  sighted  by  the  pickets  the  alarm  was 
sounded.  The  strikers  were  aroused  from  their  sleep 
and  within  a  few  minutes  the  river  front  was  covered 
with  a  crowd  of  coatless  and  hatless  men  armed  with 
guns  and  rifles  and  grimly  determined  to  prevent  the 
landing  of  the  Pinkertons.  The  latter,  however,  did  not 
seem  to  appreciate  the  gravity  of  the  situation.  They 
sought  to  intimidate  the  strikers  by  assuming  a  threat- 
ening attitude  and  aiming  the  muzzles  of  their  shining 
revolvers  at  them.  A  moment  of  intense  expectation 
followed.  Then  a  shot  was  fired  from  the  boat  and  one 
of  the  strikers  fell  to  the  ground  mortally  wounded.  A 
howl  of  fury  and  a  volley  of  bullets  came  back  from  the 
line  of  the  strikers,  and  a  wild  fusillade  was  opened  on 


294      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

both  sides.  In  vain  did  the  strike  leaders  attempt  to 
pacify  the  men  and  to  stop  the  carnage — the  strikers 
were  beyond  control.  The  struggle  lasted  several  hours, 
after  which  the  Pinkertons  retreated  from  the  river  bank 
and  withdrew  to  the  cabin  of  the  boat.  There  they  re- 
mained in  the  sweltering  heat  of  the  July  sun  without 
air  or  ventilation,  under  the  continuing  fire  of  the  en- 
raged men  on  the  shore,  until  they  finally  surrendered. 
They  were  imprisoned  by  the  strikers  in  a  rink,  and  in 
the  evening  they  were  sent  out  of  town  by  rail.  The 
number  of  dead  on  both  sides  was  twelve,  and  over 
twenty  were  seriously  wounded."  (17) 

These  events  aroused  the  entire  country,  and  the  state 
of  mind  among  the  working  people  generally  was  exceed- 
ingly bitter.  It  was  a  tension  that  under  certain  circum- 
stances might  have  provoked  a  civil  war.  Both  the 
Senate  and  the  House  of  Representatives  immediately 
appointed  committees  to  inquire  into  this  movement  from 
state  to  state  of  armed  men,  and  the  employment  by 
corporations  of  what  amounted  to  a  private  army.  It 
seems  to  have  been  clearly  established  that  the  employers 
wanted  war,  and  that  the  attorney  of  the  Carnegie  Com- 
pany had  commanded  the  local  sheriff  to  deputize  a  man 
named  Gray,  who  was  to  meet  the  mercenaries  and  make 
all  of  them  deputy  sheriffs.  This  plan  to  make  the 
detectives  "legal"  assassins  did  not  carry,  and  the  result 
was  that  a  band  of  paid  thugs,  thieves,  and  murderers 
invaded  Homestead  and  precipitated  a  bloody  conflict. 
This  was,  of  course,  infamous,  and,  compared  with  its 
magnificent  anarchy,  Berkman's  assault  was  child-like  in 
its  simplicity.  Yet  the  enthusiastic  and  idealistic  Berk- 
man  spent  seventeen  years  in  prison  and  is  still  ab- 
horred ;  while  no  one  responsible  for  the  murder  of 
twelve  workingmen  and  the  wounding  of  twenty  others. 


THE  OLDEST  ANARCHISM  295 

either  among  the  mercenaries  or  their  employers,  has 
yet  been  apprehended  or  convicted.  With  such  equality 
of  justice  do  we  treat  these  agents  of  the  two  anarchies! 
However,  if  Berkman  spent  seventeen  years  in  prison, 
the  other  anarchists  were  mildly  rebuked  by  the  Commit- 
tee of  Investigation  appointed  by  the  Senate.  "Your 
committee  is  of  the  opinion,"  runs  the  report,  "that  the 
employment  of  the  private  armed  guards  at  Homestead 
was  unnecessary.  There  is  no  evidence  to  show  that  the 
slightest  damage  was  done,  or  attempted  to  be  done,  to 
property  on  the  part  of  the  strikers.  .  .  ."  (18) 
"It  was  claimed  by  the  Pinkerton  agency  that  in  all  cases 
they  require  that  their  men  shall  be  sworn  in  as  deputy 
sheriffs,  but  it  is  a  significant  circumstance  that  in  the 
only  strike  your  committee  made  inquiry  concerning — 
that  at  Homestead — the  fact  was  admitted  on  all  hands 
that  the  armed  men  supplied  by  the  Pinkertons  were  not 
so  sworn,  and  that  as  private  citizens  acting  under  the 
direction  of  such  of  their  own  men  as  were  in  command 
they  fired  upon  the  people  of  Homestead,  killing  and 
wounding  a  number."  (19)  "Every  man  who  testified, 
including  the  proprietors  of  the  detective  agencies,  ad- 
mitted that  the  workmen  are  strongly  prejudiced  against 
the  so-called  Pinkertons,  and  that  their  presence  at  a 
strike  serves  to  unduly  inflame  the  passions  of  the  strik- 
ers. The  prejudice  against  them  arises  partly  from  the 
fact  that  they  are  frequently  placed  among  workmen,  in 
the  disguise  of  mechanics,  to  report  alleged  conversations 
to  their  agencies,  which,  in  turn,  is  transmitted  to  the 
employers  of  labor.  Your  committee  is  impressed  with 
the  belief  that  this  is  an  utterly  vicious  system,  and  that 
it  is  responsible  for  much  of  the  ill-feeling  and  bad  blood 
displayed  by  the  working  classes.  No  self-respecting 
laborer  or  mechanic  likes  to  feel  that  the  man  beside 


296      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

him  may  be  a  spy  from  a  detective  agency,  and  espe- 
cially so  when  the  laboring  man  is  utterly  at  the  mercy 
of  the  detective,  who  can  report  whatever  he  pleases, 
be  it  true  or  false.  .  .  .  (20)  Whether  assumedly 
legal  or  not,  the  employment  of  armed  bodies  of 
men  for  private  purposes,  either  by  employers  or  em- 
ployees, is  to  be  deprecated  and  should  not  be  resorted  to. 
Such  use  of  private  armed  men  is  an  assumption  of  the 
State's  authority  by  private  citizens.  If  the  State  is 
incapable  of  protecting  citizens  in  their  rights  of  person 
and  property,  then  anarchy  is  the  result,  and  the  original 
law  of  force  should  neither  be  approved,  encouraged,  nor 
tolerated  until  all  known  legal  processes  have  failed." 
(21) 

We  must  leave  this  black  page  in  American  history 
with  such  comfort  as  we  can  wring  from  the  fact  that 
the  modern  exponents  of  the  oldest  anarchy  have  been 
at  least  once  rebuked,  and  with  the  further  satisfaction 
that  the  Homestead  tragedy  brought  momentarily  to  the 
attention  of  the  entire  nation  a  practice  which  even  at 
that  time  was  a  source  of  great  alarm  to  many  serious 
men.  In  the  great  strikes  which  occurred  in  the  late 
eighties  and  early  nineties  there  was  a  great  deal  of  vio- 
lence, and  C.  H.  Salmons,  in  his  history  of  "The  Bur- 
lington Strike"  of  1888,  relates  how  private  detectives 
systematically  planned  outrages  that  destroyed  property 
and  how  others  committed  murder.  A  few  cases  were 
fought  out  in  the  courts  with  results  very  disconcerting 
to  the  railroads  who  had  hired  these  private  detectives. 
In  the  strike  on  the  New  York  Central  Railroad  which 
occurred  in  1890  many  detectives  were  employed.  They 
were,  of  course,  armed,  and,  as  a  result  of  certain  crim- 
inal operations  undertaken  by  them,  Congress  was  asked 
to  consider  the  drafting  of  a  bill  "to  prevent  corpora- 


THE  OLDEST  ANARCHISM  297 

tions  engaged  in  interstate-commerce  traffic  from  employ- 
ing unjustifiably  large  bodies  of  armed  men  denominated 
'detectives,'  but  clothed  with  no  legal  functions."  (22) 
Roger  A.  Pryor,  then  Justice  of  the  Supreme  Court  of 
New  York,  vigorously  protested  against  these  "watch- 
men." "I  mean,"  he  said,  "the  enlistment  of  banded 
and  armed  mercenaries  under  the  command  of  private 
detectives  on  the  side  of  corporations  in  their  conflicts 
with  employees.  The  pretext  for  such  an  extraordinary 
measure  is  the  protection  of  the  corporate  property;  and 
surely  the  power  of  this  great  State  is  adequate  to  the 
preservation  of  the  public  order  and  security.  At  all 
events,  in  this  particular  instance,  it  was  not  pretended 
either  that  the  strikers  had  invaded  property  or  person, 
or  that  the  police  or  militia  in  Albany  had  betrayed  re- 
luctance or  inability  to  cope  with  the  situation.  On  the 
contrary,  the  facts  are  undisputed  that  the  moment  the 
men  went  out  Mr.  Pinkerton  and  his  myrmidons  ap- 
peared on  the  scene,  and  the  police  of  Albany  declared 
their  competency  to  repel  any  trespass  on  person  01" 
property.  The  executive  of  the  State,  too,  denied  any 
necessity  for  the  presence  of  the  military. 

"I  do  not  impute  to  the  railroad  officials  a  purpose, 
without  provocation,  to  precipitate  their  ruffians  upon  a 
defenseless  and  harmless  throng  of  spectators;  but  the 
fact  remains  that  the  ruffians  in  their  hire  did  shoot  into 
the  crowd  without  occasion,  and  did  so  shed  innocent 
blood.  And  it  is  enough  to  condemn  the  system  that  it 
authorizes  unofficial  and  irresponsible  persons  to  usurp 
the  most  delicate  and  difficult  functions  of  the  State  and 
exposes  the  lives  of  citizens  to  the  murderous  assaults 
of  hireling  assassins,  stimulated  to  violence  by  panic  or 
by  the  suggestion  of  employers  to  strike  terror  by  an 
appalling  exhibition  of  force.     If  the  railroad  company 


298      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

may  enlist  armed  men  to  defend  its  property,  the  em- 
ployees may  enlist  armed  men  to  defend  their  persons, 
and  thus  private  war  be  inaugurated,  the  authority  of 
the  State  defied,  the  peace  and  tranquillity  of  society  de- 
stroyed, and  the  citizens  exposed  to  the  hazard  of  indis- 
criminate slaughter."  (23) 

Perhaps  the  most  extensive  use  of  these  so-called  de- 
tectives was  at  the  time  of  the  great  railway  strike  of 
1894.  The  strike  of  the  workers  at  Pullman  led  to  a 
general  sympathetic  strike  on  all  the  railroads  entering 
Chicago,  and  from  May  11  to  July  13  there  was  waged 
one  of  the  greatest  industrial  battles  in  American  history. 
A  railway  strike  is  always  a  serious  matter,  and  in  a 
short  time  the  Government  came  to  the  active  support  of 
the  railroads.  At  one  time  over  fourteen  thousand  sol- 
diers, deputy  marshals,  deputy  sheriffs,  and  policemen 
were  on  duty  in  Chicago.  During  the  period  of  the 
strike  twelve  persons  were  shot  and  fatally  wounded. 
A  number  of  riots  occurred,  cars  were  burned,  and,  as  a 
result  of  the  disturbances,  no  less  than  seven  hundred 
persons  were  arrested,  accused  of  murder,  arson,  burglary, 
assault,  intimidation,  riot,  and  other  crimes.  The  most 
accurate  information  we  have  concerning  conditions  in 
Chicago  during  the  strike  is  to  be  found  in  the  evidence 
which  was  taken  by  the  United  States  Strike  Commission 
appointed  by  President  Cleveland  July  26,  1894.  There 
seems  to  be  no  doubt  that  during  the  early  days  of  the 
strike  perfect  peace  reigned  in  Chicago.  At  the  very  be- 
ginning of  the  trouble  three  hundred  strikers  were  de- 
tailed by  the  unions  to  guard  the  property  of  the  Pull- 
man company  from  any  interference  or  destruction.  "It 
is  in  evidence,  and  uncontradicted,"  reports  the  Commis- 
sion, "that  no  violence  or  destruction  of  property  by 
strikers  or  sympathizers  took  place  at  Pullman."   (24) 


THE  OLDEST  ANARCHISM  299 

It  also  appears  that  no  violence  occurred  in  Chicago  in 
connection  with  the  strike  until  after  several  thousand 
men  were  made  United  States  deputy  marshals.     These 
"United  States  deputy  marshals."  says  the  Commission, 
"to  the  number  of  3,600,  were  selected  by  and  appointed 
at  the  request  of  the  General  Managers'  Association,  and 
of  its  railroads.    They  were  armed  and  paid  by  the  rail- 
roads." (25)     In  other  words,  the  United  States  Govern- 
ment gave  over  its  police  power  directly  into  the  hands 
of  one  of  the  combatants.    It  allowed  these  private  com- 
panies, through  detective  agencies,  to  collect  as  hastily  as 
possible  a  great  body  of  unemployed,  to  arm  them,  and 
to  send  them  out  as  officials  of  the  United  States  to  do 
whatsoever  was  desired  by  the  railroads.    They  were  not 
under  the  control  of  the  army  or  of  responsible  United 
States  officials,  and  their  intrusion  into  a  situation  so 
tense  and  critical  as  that  then  existing  in  Chicago  was 
certain  to  produce  trouble.    And  the  fact  is,  the  lawless- 
ness that  prevailed  in  Chicago  during  that  strike  began 
only  after  the  appearance  of  these  private  "detectives." 
It  will  astonish  the  ordinary  American  citizen  to  read 
of  the  character  of  the  men  to  whom  the  maintenance  of 
law  and  order  was  entrusted.     Superintendent  of  Police 
Brennan  referred  to  these  deputy  marshals  in  an  official 
report  to  the  Council  of  Chicago  as  "thugs,  thieves,  and 
ex-convicts,"  and  in  his  testimony  before  the  Commission 
itself  he  said :     "Some  of  the  deputy  marshals  who  are 
now  over  in  the  county  jail     .     .     .     were  arrested  while 
deputy  marshals  for  highway  robbery."   (26)      Several 
newspaper  men,  when  asked  to  testify  regarding  the  char- 
acter of  these  United  States  deputies,  referred  to  them 
variously  as  "drunkards,"  "loafers,"  "bums,"  and  "crim- 
inals."    The  now  well-known  journalist,  Ray  Stannard 
Baker,  was  at  that  time  reporting  the  strike  for  the  Chi- 


300      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

cago  Record.     He  was  asked  by  Commissioner  Carroll 
D.  Wright  as  to  the  character  of  the  United  States  deputy 
marshals.    His  answer  was  :    "From  my  experience  with 
them  I  think  it  was  very  bad  indeed.    I  saw  more  cases 
of  drunkenness,  I  believe,  among  the  United  States  dep- 
uty marshals  than  I  did  among  the  strikers."  (27)     Ben- 
jamin H.  Atwell,  reporter  for  the  Chicago  Nezvs,  testi- 
fied:    "Many  of  the  marshals  were  men  I  had  known 
around  Chicago  as  saloon  characters.     .     .     .     The  first 
day,  I  believe,  after  the  troops  arrived    ...     the  dep- 
uty marshals  went  up  into  town  and  some  of  them  got 
pretty  drunk."    (28)    Malcomb  McDowell,  reporter  for 
the  Chicago  Record,  testified  that  the  deputy  marshals 
and  deputy  sheriffs  "were  not  the  class  of  men  who  ought 
to  be  made  deputy  marshals  or  deputy  sheriffs.     .     .     . 
They  seemed  to  be  hunting  trouble  all  the  time.     .     .     . 
At  one  time  a  serious  row  nearly  resulted  because  some 
of  the  deputy  marshals  standing  on  the  railroad  track 
jeered   at  the  women  that  passed   and   insulted   them. 
.     .     .     I  saw  more  deputy  sheriffs  and  deputy  marshals 
drunk  than  I  saw  strikers  drunk."  (29)    Harold  I.  Cleve- 
land, reporter  for  the  Chicago  Herald,  testified :    "I  was 
...     on  the  Western  Indiana  tracks  for  fourteen  days 
.     .     .     and  I  suppose  I  saw  in  that  time  a  couple  of 
hundred  deputy  marshals.     ...     I  think  they  were  a 
very  low,  contemptible  set  of  men."   (30) 

In  Mr.  Baker's  testimony  he  speaks  of  seeing  in  one 
of  the  riots  "a  big,  rough-looking  fellow,  whom  the  people 
called  Tat.'  "  (31)  He  was  the  leader  of  the  mob,  and 
when  the  riot  was  over,  "he  mounted  a  beer  keg  in  front 
of  one  of  the  saloons  and  advised  men  to  go  home,  get 
their  guns,  and  come  out  and  fight  the  troops,  fire  on 
them."  .  .  .  The  same  man  appeared  two  nights  later 
at  Whiting,  Indiana,  and  made  quite  a  disturbance  there, 


THE  OLDEST  ANARCHISM  301 

roused  the  people  up.  In  all  that  mob  that  had  hold  of 
the  ropes  I  do  not  think  there  were  many  American  Rail- 
way Union  men.  I  think  they  were  mostly  roughs  from 
Chicago.  .  .  .  The  police  knew  well  enough  all  about 
this  man  I  have  mentioned  who  was  the  ringleader  of  the 
mob,  but  they  did  nothing  and  the  deputy  marshals  were 
not  any  better."  (32)  For  some  inscrutable  reason,  cer- 
tain men,  none  of  whom  were  railroad  employees,  were 
allowed  openly  to  provoke  violence.  Fortunately,  how- 
ever, they  were  not  able  to  induce  the  actual  strikers  to 
participate  in  their  assaults  upon  railroad  property,  and 
every  newspaper  man  testified  that  the  riots  were,  in  the 
main,  the  work  of  the  vicious  elements  of  Chicago.  They 
were,  said  one  witness,  "all  loafers,  idlers,  a  petty  class 
of  criminals  well  known  to  the  police."  (33)  Malcomb 
McDowell  testified  concerning  one  riot  which  he  had 
reported  for  the  papers:  "The  men  did  not  look  like 
railroad  men.  .  .  .  Most  of  them  were  foreigners, 
and  one  of  the  men  in  the  crowd  told  me  afterward  that 
he  was  a  detective  from  St.  Louis.  He  gave  me  the  name 
of  the  agency  at  the  time."  (34) 

Mr.  Eugene  V.  Debs,  the  leader  of  that  great  strike, 
in  a  pamphlet  entitled  The  Federal  Government  and  the 
Chicago  Strike,  calls  particular  attention  to  the  following 
declaration  of  the  United  States  Strike  Commission: 
"There  is  no  evidence  before  the  Commission  that  the 
officers  of  the  American  Railway  Union  at  any  time  par- 
ticipated in  or  advised  intimidation,  violence  or  destruc- 
tion of  property.  They  knew  and  fully  appreciated  that, 
as  soon  as  mobs  ruled,  the  organised  forces  of  society 
would  crush  the  mobs  and  all  responsible  for  then-  in  the 
remotest  degree,  and  that  this  means  defeat."  (35)  Com- 
menting upon  this  statement,  Mr.  Debs  asks :  "To  whose 
interest  was  it  to  have  riots  and  fires,  lawlessness  and 


302 


VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 


crime?  To  whose  advantage  was  it  to  have  disreputable 
'deputies'  do  these  things?  Why  were  only  freight  cars, 
largely  hospital  wrecks,  set  on  fire?  Why  have  the  rail- 
roads not  yet  recovered  damages  from  Cook  County, 
Illinois,  for  failing  to  protect  their  property?  .  .  . 
The  riots  and  incendiarism  turned  defeat  into  victory 
for  the  railroads.  They  could  have  won  in  no  other 
way.  They  had  everything  to  gain  and  the  strikers  every- 
thing to  lose.  The  violence  was  instigated  in  spite  of 
the  strikers,  and  the  report  of  the  Commission  proves 
that  they  made  every  effort  in  their  power  to  preserve 
the  peace."  (36) 

This  history  is  important  in  a  study  of  the  extensive 
system  of  subsidized  violence  that  has  grown  up  in 
America.  Nearly  every  witness  before  the  Commission 
testified  that  the  strikers  again  and  again  gave  the  police 
valuable  assistance  in  protecting  the  property  of  the 
railroads.  No  testimony  was  given  that  the  workingmen 
advocated  violence  or  that  union  men  assisted  in  the  riots. 
The  ringleaders  of  all  the  serious  outbreaks  were  notori- 
ous toughs  from  Chicago's  vicious  sections,  and  they 
were  allowed  to  go  for  days  unmolested  by  the  deputy 
marshals — who,  although  representatives  of  the  United 
States  Government,  were  in  the  pay  of  the  railroads. 
In  fact,  the  evidence  all  points  to  the  one  conclusion,  that 
the  deputy  marshals  encouraged  the  violence  of  ruffians 
and  tried  to  provoke  the  violence  of  decent  men  by  in- 
sulting, drunken,  and  disreputable  conduct.  The  strikers 
realized  that  violence  was  fatal  to  their  cause,  and  the 
deputy  marshals  knew  that  violence  meant  victory  for 
the    ailroads.     And  that  proved  to  be  the  case. 

B<  fore  leaving  this  phase  of  anarchy  I  want  to  refer 
as  briefly  as  possible  to  that  series  of  fiercely  fought 
political  and  industrial  battles  that  occurred  in  Colorado 


THE  OLDEST  ANARCHISM  303 

in  the  period  from  1894  to  1904.  The  climax  of  the 
long-drawn-out  battles  there  was  perhaps  the  most  un- 
adulterated anarchy  that  has  yet  been  seen  in  America. 
It  was  a  terrorism  of  powerful  and  influential  anarchists 
who  frankly  and  brutally  answered  those  who  protested 
against  their  many  violations  of  the  United  States  Con- 
stitution:  'To  hell  with  the  Constitution!"  (37)  The 
story  of  these  Colorado  battles  is  told  in  a  report  of  an  in- 
vestigation made  by  the  United  States  Commissioner  of 
Labor  (1905).  The  reading  of  that  report  leaves  one 
with  the  impression  that  present-day  society  rests  upon 
a  volcano,  which  in  favorable  periods  seems  very  harm- 
less indeed,  but,  when  certain  elemental  forces  clash,  it 
bursts  forth  in  a  manner  that  threatens  with  destruction 
civilization  itself.  The  trouble  in  Colorado  began  with 
the  effort  on  the  part  of  the  miners'  union  to  obtain 
through  the  legislature  a  law  limiting  the  day's  work 
to  eight  hours  in  all  underground  mines  and  in  all  work 
for  reducing  and  refining  ores.  That  was  in  1894.  The 
next  year  an  eight-hour  bill  was  presented  in  the  legis- 
lature. Expressing  fear  that  such  a  bill  might  be  un- 
constitutional, the  legislature,  before  acting  upon  it,  asked 
the  Supreme  Court  to  render  a  decision.  The  Supreme 
Court  replied  that,  in  its  opinion,  such  a  bill  would  be 
unconstitutional.  In  1899,  as  a  result  of  further  agita- 
tion by  the  miners,  an  eight-hour  law  was  enacted  by 
the  legislature — a  large  majority  in  both  houses  voting 
for  the  bill.  By  unanimous  decision  the  same  year  the 
Supreme  Court  of  Colorado  declared  the  statute  uncon- 
stitutional. The  miners  were  not,  however,  discouraged, 
and  they  began  a  movement  to  secure  the  adoption  of  a 
constitutional  amendment  which  would  provide  for  the 
enactment  of  an  eight-hour  law.  All  the  political  parties 
in  the  State  of  Colorado  pledged  themselves  in  convention 


304 


VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 


to  support  such  a  measure.  In  the  general  election  of 
1902  the  constitutional  amendment  providing  for  an 
eight-hour  day  was  adopted  by  the  people  of  the  State 
by  72,980  votes  against  26,266.  This  was  a  great  vic- 
tory for  the  miners,  and  it  seemed  as  if  their  work  was 
done.  According  to  all  the  traditions  and  pretensions  of 
political  life,  they  had  every  reason  to  believe  that  the 
next  session  of  the  legislature  would  pass  an  eight-hour 
law.  It  appears,  however,  that  the  corporations  had  de- 
termined at  all  cost  to  defeat  such  a  bill.  They  set  out' 
therefore  to  corrupt  wholesale  the  legislature,  and  as  a 
result  the  eight-hour  bill  was  defeated.  After  having 
done  everything  in  their  power,  patiently,  peacefully,  and 
legally  to  obtain  their  law,  and  only  after  having  been 
outrageously  betrayed  by  corrupt  public  servants,  the 
miners  as  a  last  resort,  on  the  3d  of  July,  1903,  declared  a 
strike  to  secure  through  their  own  efforts  what  a  decade 
of  pleading  and  prayers  had  failed  to  achieve. 

I  suppose  no  unbiased  observer  would  to-day  question 
that  the  political  machines  of  Colorado  had  sold  them- 
selves body  and  soul  to  the  mine  owners.  There  can 
surely  be  no  other  explanation  for  their  violation  of 
their  pledges  to  the  people  and  to  the  miners.  And 
further  evidence  of  their  perfidy  was  given  on  the  night 
of  September  3,  1903,  at  a  conference  between  some  of 
the  State  officials  and  certain  officers  of  the  Mine  Own- 
ers' Association.  Although  the  strike  up  to  this  time 
had  been  conducted  without  any  violence,  the  State  of- 
ficials agreed  that  the  mine  owners  could  have  the  aid 
of  the  militia,  provided  they  would  pay  the  expenses  of 
the  soldiers  while  they  remained  in  the  strike  district. 
Two  days  later  over  one  thousand  men  were  encamped  in 
Cripple  Creek.  All  the  strike  districts  were  at  once  put 
under  martial  law ;  the  duly  elected  officials  of  the  people 


THE  OLDEST  ANARCHISM  305 

were  commanded  to  resign  from  office;  hundreds  of  un- 
offending citizens  were  arrested  and  thrown  into  "bull 
pens" ;  the  whole  working  force  of  a  newspaper  was 
apprehended  and  taken  to  the  "bull  pen";  all  the  news 
that  went  out  concerning  the  strike  was  censored,  the 
manager  of  one  of  the  mines  acting  as  official  censor. 
At  the  same  time  this  man,  together  with  other  mine 
managers  and  friends,  organized  mobs  to  terrorize  union 
miners  and  to  force  out  of  town  anyone  whom  they 
thought  to  be  in  sympathy  with  the  strikers. 

In  the  effort  to  determine  whether  the  courts  or  the 
military  powers  were  supreme,  a  writ  of  habeas  corpus 
was  obtained  for  four  men  who  had  been  sent  by  the 
military  authorities  to  the  "bull  pen."  The  court  sent 
an  order  to  produce  the  men.  Ninety  cavalrymen  were 
then  sent  to  the  court  house.  They  surrounded  it,  per- 
mitting no  person  to  pass  through  the  lines  unless  he  was 
an  officer  of  the  court,  a  member  of  the  bar,  a  county 
official,  or  a  press  representative.  A  company  of  in- 
fantrymen then  escorted  the  four  prisoners  to  the  court, 
while  fourteen  soldiers  with  loaded  guns  and  fixed  bay- 
onets guarded  the  prisoners  until  the  court  was  called  to 
order.  When  the  court  was  adjourned,  after  an  argu- 
ment upon  the  motion  to  quash  the  return  of  the  writ, 
the  soldiers  took  the  prisoners  back  to  the  "bull  pen." 
The  next  day  Judge  Seeds  was  forced  to  adjourn  the 
court,  because  the  prisoners  were  not  present.  An  officer 
of  the  militia  was  ordered  to  have  them  in  court  at  two 
o'clock  in  the  afternoon,  but,  as  they  did  not  appear  at 
that  time,  a  continuance  was  granted  until  the  following 
day.  On  September  23  a  large  number  of  soldiers,  cav- 
alry and  infantry,  surrounded  the  court  house.  A  Gatling 
gun  was  placed  in  position  nearby,  and  a  detail  of  sharp- 
shooters was  stationed  where  thev  could  command  the 


3o6      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

streets.  The  court,  in  the  face  of  this  military  display, 
cited  the  Constitution  of  Colorado,  which  declares  that 
the  military  shall  always  be  in  strict  subordination  to  the 
civil  power,  and  pointed  out  that  this  did  not  specify 
sometimes  but  always,  declaring:  "There  could  be  no 
plainer  statement  that  the  military  should  never  be  per- 
mitted to  rise  superior  to  the  civil  power  within  the  limits 
of  Colorado."  (38)  The  judge  then  ordered  the  military 
authorities  to  release  the  prisoners,  but  this  they  refused 
to  do. 

At  Victor  certain  mine  owners  commanded  the  sheriff 
to  come  to  their  club  rooms,  where  his  resignation  was 
demanded.  When  he  refused  to  resign,  guns  were  pro- 
duced, a  coiled  rope  was  dangled  before  him,  and  on 
the  outside  several  shots  were  fired.  He  was  told  that 
unless  he  resigned  the  mob  outside  the  building  would 
be  admitted  and  he  would  be  taken  out  and  hanged.  He 
then  signed  a  written  resignation,  and  a  member  of  the 
Mine  Owners'  Association  was  appointed  sheriff.  With 
this  new  sheriff  in  charge,  the  mine  owners,  mine  man- 
agers, and  all  they  could  employ  for  the  purpose  arrested 
on  all  hands  everybody  that  seemed  unfriendly  to  their 
anarchy.  The  new  sheriff  and  a  militia  officer  com- 
manded the  Portland  mine,  which  was  then  having  no 
trouble  with  its  employees,  to  shut  down.  By  this  order 
four  hundred  and  seventy-five  men  were  thrown  out  of 
employment.  In  these  various  ways  the  mobs  organized 
by  the  mine  owners  were  allowed  to  obliterate  the  Gov- 
ernment and  abolish  republican  institutions,  under  the 
immediate  protection  of  their  leased  military  forces. 

At  Telluride,  also,  the  military  overpowered  the  civil 
authorities.  When  Judge  Theron  Stevens  came  there  to 
hold  the  regular  session  of  court  he  was  met  by  soldiers 
and  a  mob  of  three  hundred  persons.     Seeing  that  it 


the  Eldest  anarchism  307 

was  impossible  for  the  civil  authorities  to  exercise  any 
power,  he  decided  to  adjourn  the  court  until  the  next 
term,  declaring:  "The  demonstration  at  the  depot  last 
night  upon  the  arrival  of  the  train  could  only  have  been 
planned  and  executed  for  the  purpose  of  showing  the 
contempt  of  the  militia  and  a  certain  portion  of  this  com- 
munity for  the  civil  authority  of  the  State  and  the  civil 
authority  of  this  district.  I  had  always  been  led  to  sup- 
pose from  such  research  as  I  have  been  able  to  make 
that  in  a  republic  like  ours  the  people  were  supreme; 
that  the  people  had  expressed  their  will  in  a  constitution 
which  was  enacted  for  the  government  of  all  in  authority 
in  this  State.  That  constitution  provides  that  the  mili- 
tary shall  always  be  in  strict  subordination  to  the  civil 
authorities."  (39) 

While  this  terrorism  of  the  powerful  was  in  full  sway 
in  Colorado,  the  entire  world  was  being  told  through 
the  newspapers  of  the  infamous  crimes  being  com- 
mitted daily  by  the  Western  Federation  of  Miners. 
Countless  newspaper  stories  were  sent  out  telling  in  de- 
tail of  mines  blown  up,  of  trains  wrecked,  of  men  mur- 
dered through  agents  of  this  federation  of  toilers  en- 
gaged day  in  and  day  out  at  a  dangerous  occupation  in 
the  bowels  of  the  earth.  Not  loafers,  idlers,  or  drunk- 
ards, but  men  with  calloused  hands  and  bent  backs.  Sto- 
ries were  sent  around  the  world  of  these  laborers  being 
arraigned  in  court  charged  with  the  most  infamous  and 
dastardly  crimes.  Yet  hardly  once  has  it  been  reported  in 
the  press  of  the  world  that  in  "every  trial  that  has  been 
held  in  the  State  of  Colorado  during  the  present  strike 
where  the  membership  has  been  charged  with  almost 
every  perfidy  in  the  catalogue  of  crime,  a  jury  has 
brought  in  a  verdict  of  acquittal."  (40)  On  the  other 
hand,   a  multitude  of  murders,  wrecks,   and   dynamite 


308      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

explosions  have  been  brought  to  the  door  of  the  detectives 
employed  by  the  Mine  Owners'  Association.  It  was 
found  that  many  ex-convicts  and  other  desperate  charac- 
ters were  employed  by  the  detective  agencies  to  commit 
crimes  that  could  be  laid  upon  the  working  miners. 
The  story  of  Orchard  and  the  recital  of  his  atrocious 
crimes  have  occupied  columns  of  every  newspaper,  but 
the  fact  is  rarely  mentioned  that  many  of  the  crimes  that 
he  committed,  and  which  the  world  to-day  attributes  to 
the  officials  of  the  Western  Federation  of  Miners,  were 
paid  for  by  detective  agencies.  The  special  detective  of 
one  of  the  railroads  and  a  detective  of  the  Mine  Owners' 
Association  were  known  to  have  employed  Orchard  and 
other  criminals.  When  Orchard  first  went  to  Denver  to 
seek  work  from  the  officials  of  the  Western  Federation  of 
Miners  he  was  given  a  railroad  pass  by  these  detectives 
and  the  money  to  pay  his  expenses.  (41)  During  the 
three  months  preceding  the  blowing  up  of  the  Independ- 
ence depot  Orchard  had  been  seen  at  least  eighteen  or 
twenty  times  entering  at  night  by  stealth  the  rooms  of 
a  detective  attached  to  the  Mine  Owners'  Association, 
and  at  least  seven  meetings  were  held  between  him  and 
the  railroad  detective  already  mentioned. 

Previous  to  all  this — in  September  and  in  November, 
1903 — attempts  were  made  to  wreck  trains.  A  delinquent 
member  of  the  Western  Federation  of  Miners  was 
charged  with  these  crimes.  He  involved  in  his  confes- 
sion several  prominent  members  of  the  Western  Federa- 
tion of  Miners.  On  cross-examination  he  testified  that 
he  had  formerly  been  a  prize-fighter  and  that  he  had 
come  to  Cripple  Creek  under  an  assumed  name.  He 
further  testified  that  $250  was  his  price  for  wrecking 
a  train  carrying  two  hundred  to  three  hundred  people, 
but  that  he  had  asked  $500  for  this  job,  as  another  man 


THE  OLDEST  ANARCHISM  309 

would  have  to  work  with  him.  Two  detectives  had 
promised  him  that  amount.  An  associate  of  this  man 
was  discovered  to  have  been  a  detective  who  had  later 
joined  the  Western  Federation  of  Miners.  He  testified 
that  he  had  kept  the  detective  agencies  informed  as  to 
the  progress  of  the  plot  to  derail  the  train.  The  detec- 
tive of  the  Mine  Owners'  Association  admitted  that  he 
and  the  other  detectives  had  endeavored  to  induce  mem- 
bers of  the  miners'  union  to  enter  into  the  plot ;  while 
the  railroad  detective  testified  that  he  and  another  de- 
tective were  standing  only  a  few  feet  away  when  men 
were  at  work  pulling  the  spikes  from  the  rails.  An 
engineer  on  the  Florence  and  Cripple  Creek  Railroad 
testified  that  the  railroad  detective  had,  a  few  days  before, 
asked  him  where  there  was  a  good  place  for  wrecking 
the  train.  The  result  of  the  case  was  that  all  were  ac- 
quitted except  the  ex-prize-fighter,  who  was  held  for  a 
time,  but  eventually  released  on  $300  bond,  furnished  by 
representatives  of  the  mine  owners.  (42) 

On  June  6,  1904,  when  about  twenty-five  non-union 
miners  were  waiting  at  the  Independence  depot  for  a 
train,  there  was  a  terrible  explosion  which  resulted  in 
great  loss  of  life.  It  has  never  been  discovered  who 
committed  the  crime,  though  the  mine  owners  lost  no 
time  in  attributing  the  explosion  to  the  work  of  "the 
assassins"  of  the  Federation  of  Miners.  When,  how- 
ever, bloodhounds  were  put  on  the  trail,  they  went  di- 
rectly to  the  home  of  one  of  the  detectives  in  the  employ 
of  the  Mine  Owners'  Association.  They  were  taken  back 
to  the  scene  of  the  disaster  and  again  followed  the  trail 
to  the  same  place.  A  third  attempt  was  made  with  the 
hounds  and  they  followed  a  trail  to  the  powder  maga- 
zine of  a  nearby  mine.  The  Western  Federation  of 
Miners  offered  a  reward  of  $5,000  for  evidence  which 


3io 


VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 


would  lead  to  the  arrest  and  conviction  of  the  criminal 
who  had  perpetrated  the  outrage  at  Independence.  Un- 
fortunately, the  criminal  was  never  found.  Orchard,  a 
year  or  so  later,  confessed  that  he  had  committed  the 
crime  and  was  paid  for  it  by  the  officials  of  the  Western 
Federation  of  Miners.  The  absurdity  of  that  statement 
becomes  clear  when  it  is  known  that  the  court  in  Denver 
was  at  the  very  moment  of  the  explosion  deciding  the 
habeas  corpus  case  of  Moyer,  President  of  the  Western 
Federation  of  Miners.  In  fact,  a  few  hours  after  the 
explosion  the  decision  of  the  court  was  handed  down. 
As  the  action  of  the  court  was  vital  not  only  to  Moyer  but 
to  the  entire  trade-union  movement,  and,  indeed,  to  re- 
publican institutions,  it  is  inconceivable  that  he  or  his 
friends  should  have  organized  an  outrage  that  would 
certainly  have  prejudiced  the  court  at  the  very  moment 
it  was  writing  its  decision.  On  the  other  hand,  there 
was  every  reason  why  the  mine  owners  should  have 
profited  by  such  an  outrage  and  that  their  detectives 
should  have  planned  one  for  that  moment.* 

The  atrocities  of  the  Congo  occurred  in  a  country  with- 
out law,  in  the  interest  of  a  great  property,  and  in  a  series 
of  battles  with  a  half-savage  people.  History  has  some- 
what accustomed  us  to  such  barbarity;  but  when,  in  a 
civilized  country,  with  a  written  constitution,  with  duly 
established  courts,  with  popularly  elected  representatives, 
and   apparently  with   all   the   necessary   machinery   for 

*  The  Supreme  Court  sustained  the  action  of  the  military  au- 
thorities, Chief  Justice  William  H.  Gabbert,  Associate  Justice 
John  Campbell,  concurring,  Associate  Justice  Robert  W.  Steele 
dissenting.  The  dissenting  opinion  of  Justice  Steele  deserves  a 
wider  reading  than  it  has  received,  and  no  doubt  it  will  rank 
among  the  most  important  statements  that  have  been  made 
against  the  anarchy  of  the  powerful  and  the  tyranny  of  class 
government.     See  Report,  U.  S.  Bureau  of  Labor,   1905,  p.  243. 


THE  OLDEST  ANARCHISM  311 

dealing  out  equal  justice,  one  suddenly  sees  a  feudal 
despotism  arise,  as  if  by  magic,  to  usurp  the  political, 
judicial,  and  military  powers  of  a  great  state,  and  to 
use  them  to  arrest  hundreds  without  warrant  and  throw 
them  into  "bull  pens";  to  drive  hundreds  of  others  out 
of  their  homes  and  at  the  point  of  the  bayonet  out  of  the 
state;  to  force  others  to  labor  against  their  will  or  to  be 
beaten ;  to  depose  the  duly  elected  officials  of  the  com- 
munity; to  insult  the  courts;  to  destroy  the  property  of 
those  who  protest;  and  even  to  murder  those  who  show 
signs  of  revolt — one  stands  aghast.  It  makes  one  won- 
der just  how  far  in  reality  we  are  removed  from  bar- 
barism. Is  it  possible  that  the  likelihood  of  the  workers 
achieving  an  eight-hour  day — which  was  all  that  was 
wanted  in  Colorado — could  lead  to  civil  war?  Yet  that 
is  what  might  and  perhaps  should  have  happened  in 
Colorado  in  1904,  when,  for  a  few  months,  a  military 
despotism  took  from  the  people  there  all  that  had  been 
won  by  centuries  of  democratic  striving  and  thrust  them 
back  into  the  Middle  Ages. 

Chaotic  political  and  industrial  conditions  are,  of 
course,  occasionally  inevitable  in  modern  society — torn 
as  it  is  by  the  very  bitter  struggle  going  on  constantly 
between  capital  and  labor.  When  this  struggle  breaks 
into  war,  as  it  often  does,  we  are  bound  to  suffer  some 
of  the  evils  that  invariably  attend  war.  Certainly,  it  is 
to  be  expected  that  the  owners  of  property  will  exercise 
every  power  they  possess  to  safeguard  their  property. 
They  will,  whenever  possible,  use  the  State  and  all  its 
coercive  powers  in  order  to  retain  their  mastery  over  men 
and  things.  The  only  question  is  this,  must  people  in 
general  continue  to  be  the  victims  of  a  commerce  which 
has  for  its  purpose  the  creation  of  situations  that  force 
nearly  every  industrial  dispute  to  become  a  bloody  con- 


312      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

flict?  When  men  combine  to  commit  depredations,  de- 
stroy property,  and  murder  individuals,  society  must  deal 
with  them — no  matter  how  harshly.  But  it  is  an  alto- 
gether different  matter  to  permit  privately  paid  criminals 
to  create  whenever  desired  a  state  of  anarchy,  in  order 
to  force  the  military  to  carry  out  ferocious  measures  of 
repression  against  those  who  have  been  in  no  wise 
responsible    for   disorder. 

If  we  will  look  into  this  matter  a  little,  we  shall  dis- 
cover certain  sinister  motives  back  of  this  work  of  the 
detective  agencies.  It  is  well  enough  understood  by  them 
that  violence  creates  a  state  of  reaction.  One  very  keen 
observer  has  pointed  out  that  "the  anarchist  tactics  are 
so  serviceable  to  the  reactionaries  that,  whenever  a  dra- 
conic,  reactionary  law  is  required,  they  themselves  manu- 
facture an  anarchist  plot  or  attempted  crime."  (43)  Kro- 
potkin  himself,  in  telling  the  story  of  "The  Terror  in 
Russia,"  points  out  that  a  certain  Azeff,  who  for  six- 
teen years  was  an  agent  of  the  Russian  police,  was  also 
the  chief  organizer  of  acts  of  terrorism  among  the  social 
revolutionists.  (44)  Every  conceivable  crime  was  com- 
mitted under  his  direct  instigation,  including  even  the 
murder  of  some  officials  and  nobles.  The  purpose  of 
the  work  of  this  police  agent  was,  of  course,  to  serve  the 
Russian  reactionaries  and  to  furnish  them  a  pretext  and 
excuse  for  the  most  bloody  measures  of  repression.  In 
America  "hireling  assassins,"  ex-convicts,  and  thugs  in 
the  employ  of  detective  agencies  commit  very  much  the 
same  crimes  for  the  same  purpose.  And  the  men  on 
strike,  who  have  neither  planned  nor  dreamed  of  plan- 
ning an  outrage,  suddenly  find  themslves  faced  by  the 
military  forces,  who  have  not  infrequently  in  the  past 
shot  them  down.  That  the  lawless  situations  which  make 
these  infamous  acts  possible,  and  to  the  general  public 


THE  OLDEST  ANARCHISM  313 

often  excusable,  are  the  deliberate  work  of  mercenaries, 
is,  to  my  mind,  open  to  no  question  whatever. 

Anyone  who  cares  to  look  up  the  history  of  the  labor 
movement  for  the  last  hundred  years  will  find  that  in 
every  great  strike  private  detectives  and  police  agents 
have  been  at  work  provoking  violence.  It  is  almost  in- 
credible what  a  large  number  of  criminal  operations  can 
be  traced  to  these  paid  agents.  From  181 5  to  the  pres- 
ent day  the  bitterness  of  nearly  every  industrial  conflict 
of  importance  has  been  intensified  by  the  work  of  these 
spies,  thugs,  and  provocateurs.  "It  was  not  until  we 
became  infested  by  spies,  incendiaries,  and  their  dupes — 
distracting,  misleading,  and  betraying — that  physical  force 
was  mentioned  among  us,"  says  Bam  ford,  speaking  of 
the  trade-union  activity  of  1815-1816.  "After  that  our 
moral  power  waned,  and  what  we  gained  by  the  accession 
of  demagogues  we  lost  by  their  criminal  violence  and 
the  estrangement  of  real  friends."  (45)  Some  of  the 
notable  police  agents  that  appear  in  the  history  of  labor 
are  Powell,  Mitchell,  Legg.  Stieber,  Greif,  Fleury,  Baron 
von  Ungern-Sternberg,  Schroeder-Brennwald,  Krueger, 
Kaufmann,  Peukert,  Ilaupt,  Von  Ehrenberg,  Friedeman, 
Weiss,  Schmidt,  and  Ihring-AIahlow.  In  addition  we 
find  Andre,  Andrieux,  Pourbaix,  Melville,  and  scores 
of  other  high  police  officials  directing  the  work  of  these 
agents.  In  America,  McPartland,  Schaack,  and  Orchard 
— to  mention  the  most  notorious  only — have  played  in- 
famous roles  in  provoking  others,  or  in  undertaking  them- 
selves, to  commit  outrages.  There  were  and  are,  of 
course,  thousands  of  others  besides  those  mentioned, 
but  these  are  historic  characters,  who  planned  and  exe- 
cuted the  most  dastardly  deeds  in  order  to  discredit  the 
trade-union  and  socialist  movements.  The  space  here  is 
too  limited  to  go  into  the  historic  details  of  this  com- 


314      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

merce  in  violence.  But  he  who  is  curious  to  pursue  the 
study  further  will  find  a  list  of  references  at  the  end  of 
the  volume  directing  him  to  some  of  the  sources  of  in- 
formation. (46)  He  will  there  discover  an  appalling  rec- 
ord of  crime,  for,  as  Thomas  Beet  points  out,  hardly  a 
strike  occurs  where  these  special  officers  are  not  sent  to 
make  trouble.  There  are  sometimes  thousands  of  them 
at  work,  and,  if  one  undertook  to  go  into  the  various 
trials  that  have  arisen  as  a  result  of  labor  disputes,  one 
could  prepare  a  long  list  of  murders  committed  by  these 
"hireling  assassins." 

The  pecuniary  interest  of  the  detective  agencies  in 
provoking  crime  is  immense.  It  is  obvious  enough,  if 
one  will  but  think  of  it,  that  these  detective  agencies 
depend  for  their  profit  on  the  existence,  the  extension, 
and  the  promotion  of  criminal  operations.  The  more  that 
people  are  frightened  by  the  prospect  of  danger  to  their 
property  or  menace  to  their  lives,  the  more  they  seek 
the  aid  of  detectives.  Nothing  proves  so  advantageous  to 
detectives  as  epidemics  of  strikes  and  even  of  robberies 
and  murders.  The  heyday  of  their  prosperity  comes  in 
that  moment  when  assaults  upon  men  and  property  are 
most  frequent.  Nothing  would  seem  to  be  clearer,  then, 
than  that  it  is  to  the  interest  of  these  agencies  to  create 
alarm,  to  arouse  terror,  and,  through  these  means,  to 
enlarge  their  patronage.  When  a  trade  or  profession  has 
not  only  every  pecuniary  incentive  to  create  trouble,  but 
when  it  is  also  largely  promoted  by  notorious  criminals 
and  other  vicious  elements,  the  amount  of  mischief  that  is 
certain  to  result  from  the  combination  may  well  exceed 
the  powers  of  imagination. 

And  it  must  not  be  forgotten  that  this  trade  has  de- 
veloped into  a  great  and  growing  business,  actuated  by 
exactly  the  same  economic  interests  as  any  other  business. 


THE  OLDEST  ANARCHISM  315 

With  the  agencies  making  so  much  per  day  for  each  man 
employed,  the  way  to  improve  business  is  to  get  more 
men  employed.  Rumors  of  trouble  or  actual  deeds,  such 
as  an  explosion  of  dynamite  or  an  assault,  help  to  make 
the  detective  indispensable  to  the  employer.  It  is  with 
an  eye  to  business,  therefore,  that  the  private  detective 
creates  trouble.  It  is  with  a  keen  sense  of  his  own  mate- 
rial interest  that  he  keeps  the  employer  in  a  state  of 
anxiety  regarding  what  may  be  expected  from  the  men. 
And,  naturally  enough,  the  modern  employer,  unlike  a 
trained  ruler  such  as  Bismarck,  never  seems  to  realize  that 
most  of  the  alarming  reports  sent  him  are  masses  of  lies. 
Nothing  appears  to  have  been  clearer  to  the  Iron  Chancel- 
lor than  that  his  own  police  forces,  in  order  to  gain 
favor,  "lie  and  exaggerate  in  the  most  shameful  man- 
ner." (47)  But  such  an  idea  seems  never  to  enter  the 
minds  of  the  great  American  employers,  who,  although 
becoming  more  and  more  like  the  ruling  classes  of  Eu- 
rope, are  not  yet  so  wise.  However,  the  great  employer, 
like  the  great  ruler,  is  unable  now  to  meet  his  employees 
in  person  and  to  find  out  their  real  views.  Consequently, 
he  must  depend  upon  paid  agents  to  report  to  him  the 
views  of  his  men.  This  might  all  be  very  well  if  the  re- 
turns were  true.  But,  when  it  happens  that  evil  reports 
are  very  much  to  the  pecuniary  advantage  of  the  man 
who  makes  them,  is  it  likely  that  there  will  be  any  other 
kind  of  report?  Thousands  of  employers,  therefore,  are 
coming  more  and  more  to  be  convinced  that  their  work- 
men spend  most  of  their  time  plotting  against  them.  It 
seems  unreasonable  that  sane  men  could  believe  that  their 
employees,  who  are  regularly  at  work  every  day  striving 
with  might  and  main  to  support  and  bring  up  decently 
their  families,  should  be  at  the  same  time  planning  the 
most  diabolical  outrages.     Nothing  is  rarer  than  to  find 


316      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

criminals  among  workingmen,  for  if  they  were  given  to 
crime  they  would  not  be  at  work.  But  with  the  great 
modern  evil — the  separation  of  the  classes — there  comes 
so  much  of  misunderstanding  and  of  mistrust  that  the 
employer  seems  only  too  willing  to  believe  any  paid  villain 
who  tells  him  that  his  tired  and  worn  laborers  have  mur- 
der in  their  hearts.  The  class  struggle  is  a  terrible  fact ; 
but  the  class  hatred  and  the  personal  enmity  that  are 
growing  among  both  masters  and  men  in  the  United 
States  are  natural  and  inevitable  results  of  this  system  of 
spies  and  informers. 

How  widespread  this  evil  has  become  is  shown  by  the 
fact  that  nearly  every  large  corporation  now  employs 
numerous  spies,  informers,  and  special  officers,  from 
whom  they  receive  daily  reports  concerning  the  conver- 
sations among  their  men  and  the  plans  of  the  unions. 
Thousands  of  these  detectives  are,  in  fact,  members  of 
the  unions.  The  employers  are,  of  course,  under  the  im- 
pression that  they  are  thus  protecting  themselves  from 
misinformation  and  also  from  the  possibility  of  injury, 
but,  as  we  have  seen,  they  are  in  reality  placing  them- 
selves at  the  mercy  of  these  spies  in  the  same  manner 
as  every  despot  in  the  past  has  placed  himself  at 
the  mercy  of  those  who  brought  him  information. 
It  may,  perhaps,  be  possible  that  the  Carnegie  Company 
in  1892,  the  railroads  in  1894,  and  the  mine  owners  in 
1904  were  convinced  that  their  employees  were  under  the 
influence  of  dangerous  men.  Very  likely  they  were  told 
that  their  workmen  were  planning  assaults  upon  their 
lives  and  property.  It  would  not  be  strange  if  these  large 
owners  of  property  had  been  so  informed.  Indeed,  the 
economics  of  this  whole  wretched  commerce  becomes 
clear  only  when  we  realize  that  the  terror  that  results 
from  such  reports  leads  these  capitalists  to  employ  more 


THE  OLDEST  ANARCHISM  317 

and  more  hirelings,  to  pay  them  larger  and  larger  fees, 
and  in  this  manner  to  reward  lies  and  to  make  even  as- 
saults prove  immensely  profitable  to  the  detectives.  So 
it  happens  that  the  great  employers  are  chiefly  responsible 
for  introducing  among  their  men  the  very  elements  that 
are  making  for  riot,  crime,  and  anarchy. 

Close  and  intimate  relations  with  the  employers  and 
with  the  men  during  several  fiercely  fought  industrial 
conflicts  have  convinced  me  that  the  struggle  between 
them  rarely  degenerates  to  that  plane  of  barbarism  in 
which  either  the  men  or  the  masters  deliberately  resort 
to,  or  encourage,  murder,  arson,  and  similar  crimes. 
So  far  as  the  men  are  concerned,  they  have  every  reason 
in  the  world  to  discourage  violence,  and  nothing  is  clearer 
to  most  of  them  than  the  solemn  fact  that  every  time 
property  is  destroyed,  or  men  injured,  the  employers 
win  public  support,  the  aid  of  the  press,  the  pulpit,  the 
police,  the  courts,  and  all  the  powers  of  the  State.  Men 
do  not  knowingly  injure  themselves  or  persist  in  a  course 
adverse  to  their  material  interests.  It  is  true,  as  I  think 
I  have  made  clear  in  the  previous  chapters,  that  some  of 
the  workers  do  advocate  violence,  and,  in  a  few  cases 
that  instantly  became  notorious,  labor  leaders  have  been 
found  guilty  of  serious  crimes.  That  these  instances  are 
comparatively  rare  is  explained,  of  course,  by  the  fact 
that  violence  is  known  invariably  to  injure  the  cause  of 
the  worker.  It  would  be  strange,  therefore,  if  the  work- 
ers did  systematically  plan  outrages.  On  the  other  hand, 
it  would  be  strange  if  the  employers  did  not  at  times 
rejoice  that  somebody — the  workmen,  the  detectives,  or 
others — had  committed  some  outrage  and  thus  brought 
the  public  sentiment  and  the  State's  power  to  the  aid  of 
the  employers.  One  cannot  escape  the  thought  that  the 
employers  would  hardly  finance  so  re?dily  these  so-called 


3l8      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

detectives,  and  inquire  so  little  into  their  actual  deeds,  if 
they  were  not  convinced  that  violence  at  the  time  of  a 
strike  materially  aids  the  employer.  Yet,  despite  evi- 
dence to  the  contrary,  it  may,  I  think,  be  said  with  truth 
that  the  lawlessness  attending  strikes  is  not,  as  a  rule, 
the  result  of  deliberate  planning  on  the  part  of  the  men 
or  of  the  masters. 

There  are,  of  course,  numerous  exceptions,  and  if  we 
find  the  McNamaras  on  the  one  side,  we  also  find  some  un- 
scrupulous employers  on  the  other.  To  the  latter,  violence 
becomes  of  the  greatest  service,  in  that  it  enables  them 
to  say  with  apparent  truth  that  they  are  not  fighting 
reasonable,  law-abiding  workmen,  but  assassins  and  incen- 
diaries. No  course  is  easier  for  the  employer  who  does 
not  seek  to  deal  honestly  with  his  men,  and  none  more 
secure  for  that  employer  whose  position  is  wholly  inde- 
fensible on  the  subject  of  hours  and  wages,  than  to  side- 
track all  these  issues  by  hypocritically  declaring  that  he 
refuses  to  deal  with  men  who  are  led  by  criminals.  And 
it  is  quite  beyond  question  that  some  such  employers 
have  deliberately  urged  their  "detectives"  to  create 
trouble.  Positive  evidence  is  at  hand  that  a  few  such 
employers  have  themselves  directed  the  work  of  incen- 
diaries, thugs,  and  rioters.  With  such  amazing  evidence 
as  we  have  recently  had  concerning  the  systematically 
lawless  work  of  the  Manufacturers'  Association,  it  is 
impossible  to  free  the  employers  of  all  personal  responsi- 
bility for  the  outrages  committed  by  their  criminal  agents. 
There  are  many  different  ways  in  which  violence  benefits 
the  employer,  and  it  may  even  be  said  that  in  all  cases  it 
is  only  to  the  interest  of  the  employer.  As  a  matter  of 
fact,  with  the  systems  of  insurance  now  existing,  any 
injury  to  the  property  of  the  employer  means  no  loss  to 
him  whatever.    The  only  possible  loss  that  he  can  suffer 


THE  OLDEST  ANARCHISM  319 

is  through  the  prolongation  and  success  of  the  strike. 
If  the  workers  can  be  discredited  and  the  strike  broken 
through  the  aid  of  violence,  the  ordinary  employer  is 
not  likely  to  make  too  rigid  an  investigation  into  whether 
or  not  his  "detectives"  had  a  hand  in  it. 

Curiously  enough,  the  general  public  never  dreams  that 
special  officers  are  responsible  for  most  of  the  violence 
at  times  of  strike,  and,  while  the  men  loudly  accuse  the 
employers,  the  employers  loudly  accuse  the  men.  The 
employers  are,  of  course,  informed  by  the  detectives  that 
the  outrages  have  been  committed  by  the  strikers,  and 
the  detectives  have  seen  to  it  that  the  employers  are 
prepared  to  believe  that  the  strikers  are  capable  of  any- 
thing. On  the  other  hand,  the  men  are  convinced  that 
the  employers  are  personally  responsible.  They  see  hun- 
dreds and  sometimes  thousands  of  special  officers  swarm- 
ing throughout  the  district.  They  know  that  these  men 
are  paid  by  somebody,  and  they  are  convinced  that  their 
bullying,  insulting  talk  and  actions  represent  the  personal 
wishes  of  the  employers.  When  they  knock  down  strik- 
ers, beat  them  up,  arrest  them,  or  even  shoot  them,  the 
men  believe  that  all  these  acts  are  dictated  by  the  em- 
ployers. It  is  utterly  impossible  to  describe  the  bitterness 
that  is  aroused  among  the  men  by  the  presence  of  these 
thugs.  And  the  testimony  taken  by  various  commissions 
regarding  strikes  proves  clearly  enough  that  strikes  are 
not  only  embittered  but  prolonged  by  the  presence  of 
detectives.  Again  and  again,  mediators  have  declared 
that,  as  soon  as  thugs  are  brought  into  the  conflict,  the 
settlement  of  a  strike  is  made  impossible  until  either  the 
employers  or  the  men  are  exhausted  by  the  struggle.  A 
number  of  reputable  detectives  have  testified  that 
the  chief  object  of  those  who  engage  in  "strike-breaking" 
is  to  prolong  strikes  in  order  to  keep  themselves  employed 


320      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

as  long  as  possible.    Thus,  the  employers  as  well  as  the 
men  are  the  victims  of  this  commerce  in  violence. 

It  will,  I  am  sure,  be  obvious  to  the  reader  that  it 
would  require  a  very  large  volume  to  deal  with  all  the 
various  phases  of  the  work  of  the  detective  in  the 
numerous  great  strikes  that  have  occurred  in  recent  years. 
I  have  endeavored  merely  to  mention  a  few  instances 
where  their  activities  have  led  to  the  breaking  down  of 
all  civil  government.  It  is  important,  however,  to  em- 
phasize the  fact  that  there  is  no  strike  of  any  magnitude 
in  which  these  hirelings  are  not  employed.  I  have  taken 
the  following  quotation  as  typical  of  numerous  circulars 
which  I  have  seen,  that  have  been  issued  by  detective 
agencies :  "This  bureau  has  made  a  specialty  of  handling 
strikes  for  over  half  a  century,  and  our  clients  are  among 
the  largest  corporations  in  the  world.  During  the  recent 
trouble  between  the  steamboat  companies  and  the  striking 
longshoremen  in  New  York  City  this  office  .  .  .  sup- 
plied one  thousand  guards.  .  .  .  Our  charges  for 
guards,  motormen,  conductors,  and  all  classes  of  men 
during  the  time  of  trouble  is  $5.00  per  day,  your  com- 
pany to  pay  transportation,  board,  and  lodge  the  men." 
(48)  Here  is  another  agency  that  has  been  engaged 
in  this  business  for  half  a  century,  and  there  are  thou- 
sands of  others  engaged  in  it  now.  One  of  them  is 
known  to  have  in  its  employ  constantly  five  thousand  men. 
And,  if  we  look  into  the  deeds  of  these  great  armies  of 
mercenaries,  we  find  that  there  is  not  a  state  in  the 
Union  in  which  they  have  not  committed  assault,  arson, 
robbery,  and  murder.  Several  years  ago  at  Lattimer, 
Pennsylvania,  a  perfectly  peaceable  parade  of  two  hun- 
dred and  fifty  miners  was  attacked  by  guards  armed  with 
Winchester  rifles,  with  the  result  that  twenty-nine  work- 
ers were  killed  and  thirty  others  seriously  injured.    This 


THE  OLDEST  ANARCHISM  ^21 


was  deliberate  and  unprovoked  slaughter.  Recently,  in 
the  Westmoreland  mining  district,  no  less  than  twenty 
striking  miners  have  been  murdered,  while  several  hun- 
dred have  been  seriously  injured.  On  one  occasion  depu- 
ties and  strike-breakers  became  intoxicated  and  "shot  up 
the  town*'  of  Latrobe.  In  the  recent  strike  against  the 
Lake  Carriers'  Association  six  union  men  were  killed  by 
private  detectives.  In  Tampa,  Florida,  in  Columbus, 
Ohio,  in  Birmingham,  Alabama,  in  Lawrence,  Massachu- 
setts, in  Bethlehem,  Pennsylvania,  in  the  mining  districts 
of  West  Virginia,  and  in  innumerable  other  places  many 
workingmen  have  been  murdered,  not  by  officers  of  the 
law,  but  by  privately  paid  assassins. 

Even  while  writing  these  lines  I  notice  a  telegram  to 
the  Appeal  to  Reason  from  Adolph  Germer,  an  official 
of  the  United  Mine  Workers  of  America,  that  some 
thugs,  formerly  in  West  Virginia,  are  now  in  Colorado, 
and  that  their  first  work  there  was  to  shoot  down  in 
cold  blood  a  well-known  miner.  John  Walker,  a  district 
president  of  the  United  Mine  Workers  of  America,  tele- 
graphs the  same  day  to  the  labor  press  that  two  of  the 
strikers  in  the  copper  mines  in  Michigan  were  shot  down 
by  detectives,  in  the  effort,  he  says,  to  provoke  the  men 
to  violence.  Anyone  who  cares  to  follow  the  labor  press 
for  but  a  short  period  will  be  astonished  to  find  how 
frequently  such  outrages  occur,  and  he  will  marvel  that 
men  can  be  so  self-controlled  as  the  strikers  usually  are 
under  such  terrible  provocation.  I  mention  hastily  these 
facts  in  order  to  emphasize  the  point  that  the  cases  in 
which  I  have  gone  into  detail  in  this  chapter  are  more 
or  less  typical  of  the  bloody  character  of  many  of  the 
great  strikes  because  of  the  deeds  of  the  so-called  de- 
tectives. 

Brief,  however,  as  this  statement  is  of  the  work  of  these 


322      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

anarchists  "without  phrase"  and  of  the  great  commerce 
they  have  built  up,  it  must,  nevertheless,  convince  anyone 
that  republican  institutions  cannot  long  exist  in  a  country 
which  tolerates  such  an  extensive  private  commerce  in 
lawlessness  and  crime.  Government  by  law  cannot  pre- 
vail in  the  same  field  with  a  widespread  and  profitable 
traffic  in  disorder,  thuggery,  arson,  and  murder.  Here  is 
a  whole  brood  of  mercenaries,  the  output  of  hundreds  of 
great  penitentiaries,  that  has  been  organized  and  syste- 
matized into  a  great  commerce  to  serve  the  rich  and 
powerful.  Here  is  a  whole  mess  of  infamy  developed 
into  a  great  private  enterprise  that  militates  against  all 
law  and  order.  It  has  already  brought  the  United  States 
on  more  than  one  occasion  to  the  verge  of  civil  war. 
And,  despite  the  fact  that  numerous  judges  have  publicly 
condemned  the  work  of  these  agencies,  and  that  various 
governmental  commissions  have  deprecated  in  the  most 
solemn  words  this  traffic  in  crime,  it  continues  to  grow 
and  prosper  in  the  most  alarming  manner.  Certainly,  no 
student  of  history  will  doubt  that,  if  this  commerce  is 
permitted  to  continue,  it  will  not  be  long  until  no  man's 
life,  honor,  or  property  will  be  secure.  And  it  is  a  ques- 
tion, even  at  this  moment,  whether  the  legislators  have 
the  courage  to  attack  this  powerful  American  Mafia  that 
has  already  developed  into  a  "vested  interest." 

As  I  said  at  the  beginning,  no  other  country  has  this 
form  of  anarchy  to  contend  with.  In  all  countries,  no 
doubt,  there  are  associations  of  criminals,  and  every- 
where, perhaps,  it  is  possible  for  wealthy  men  to  employ 
criminals  to  work  for  them.  But  even  the  Mafia,  the 
Camorra,  and  the  Black  Hand  do  not  exist  for  the  pur- 
pose of  collecting  and  organizing  mercenaries  to  serve  the 
rich  and  powerful.  Nor  anywhere  else  in  the  world  are 
these    criminals   made    special   officers,   deputy   sheriffs, 


THE  OLDEST  ANARCHISM  323 

deputy  marshals,  and  thus  given  the  authority  of  the 
State  itself.    The  assumption  is  so  general  that  the  State 
invariably  stands  behind  the  private  detective  that  few 
seem  to  question  it,  and  even  the  courts  frequently  recog- 
nize them  as  quasi-public  officials.    Thus,  the  State  itself 
aids  and  abets  these  mercenary  anarchists,  while  it  sends 
to  the  gallows  idealist  anarchists,  such  as  Henry,  Vaillant, 
Lingg,  and  their  like.    That  the  State  fosters  this  "infant 
industry"  is  the  only  possible  explanation  for  the  fact 
that  in  every  industrial  conflict  of  the  past  the  real  pro- 
vokers and  executors  of  arson,  riot,  and  murder  have 
escaped  prison,  while  in  every  case  labor  leaders  have 
been  put  in  jail — often  without  warrant — and  in  many 
cases  kept  there  for  many  months  without  trial.     Even 
the  writ  of   habeas  corpus  has  been   denied  them  re- 
peatedly.    Without  the  active  connivance  of  the  State 
such  conditions  could  not  exist.    However,  the  State  goes 
even  further  in  its  opposition  to  labor.    The  power  of  a 
state  governor  to  call  out  the  militia,  to  declare  even  a 
peaceful  district  in  a  state  of  insurrection,  and  to  abolish 
the  writ  of  habeas  corpus  is  a  very  great  power  indeed 
and   one  that   is   unquestionably   an   anomaly   in   a   re- 
public.    If  that  power  were  used  with  equal  justice,  it 
might  not  create  the  intense  bitterness  that  has  been  so 
frequently  aroused  among  the  workers  by  its  exercise. 
Again  and  again  it  has  been  used  in  the  interest  of  capital, 
but  there  is  not  one  single  case  in  all  the  records  where 
this  extraordinary  prerogative  has  been  exercised  to  pro- 
tect the  interest  of  the  workers.     It  is  not,  then,  either 
unreasonable  or  unjustifiable  that  among  workmen  the 
sentiment  is  almost  unanimous  that  the  State  stands  in- 
variably against  them.    The  three  instances  which  I  have 
dealt  with  here  at  some  length  prove  conclusively  that 
there  is  now  no  penalty  inflicted  upon  the  capitalist  who 


324 


VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 


hires  thugs  to  invade  a  community  and  shoot  down  its 
citizens,  or  upon  those  who  hire  him  these  assassins,  or 
upon  the  assassins  themselves.  Nor  are  the  powerful 
punished  when  they  collect  a  great  army  of  criminals, 
drunkards,  and  hoodlums  and  make  them  officials  of  the 
United  States  to  insult  and  bully  decent  citizens.  Nor 
does  there  seem  to  be  any  punishment  inflicted  upon 
those  who  manage  to  transform  the  Government  itself 
into  a  shield  to  protect  toughs  and  criminals  in  their  as- 
saults upon  men  and  property,  when  those  assaults  are  in 
the  interest  of  capital.  Moreover,  what  could  be  more 
humiliating  in  a  republic  than  the  fact  that  a  governor 
who  has  leased  to  his  friends  the  military  forces  of  an 
entire  state  should  end  his  term  of  office  unimpeached  ? 

These  various  phases  of  the  class  conflict  reveal  a 
distressing  state  of  industrial  and  political  anarchy,  and 
there  can  be  no  question  that,  if  continued,  it  has  in  it 
the  power  of  making  many  McNamaras,  if  not  Bakou- 
nins.  It  will  be  fortunate,  indeed,  if  there  do  not  arise 
new  Johann  Mosts,  and  if  the  United  States  escapes 
the  general  use  in  time  of  that  terrible,  secretive, 
and  deadly  weapon  of  sabotage.  Sabotage  is  the 
arm  of  the  slave  or  the  coward,  who  dares  neither 
to  speak  his  views  nor  to  fight  an  open  fight.  As 
someone  has  said,  it  may  merely  mean  the  kicking  of 
the  master's  dog.  Yet  no  one  is  so  cruel  as  the  weak  and 
the  cowardly.  And  should  it  ever  come  about  that 
millions  and  millions  of  men  have  all  other  avenues  closed 
to  them,  there  is  still  left  to  them  sabotage,  assassination, 
and  civil  war.  These  can  neither  be  outlawed  nor  even 
effectively  guarded  against  if  there  are  individuals 
enough  who  are  disposed  to  wield  them.  And  it  is  not 
by  any  means  idle  speculation  that  a  country  which  can 
sit  calmly  by  and  face  such  evils  as  are  perpetrated  by 


THE  OLDEST  ANARCHISM  325 

this  vast  commerce  in  violence,  by  this  class  use  of  the 
State,  and  by  such  monstrous  outrages  as  were  com- 
mitted in  Homestead,  in  Chicago,  and  in  Colorado,  will 
find  one  day  its  composure  interrupted  by  a  working  class 
that  has  suffered  more  than  human  endurance  can  stand. 

The  fact  is  that  society — the  big  body  of  us — is  now 
menaced  by  two  sets  of  anarchists.  There  are  those 
among  the  poor  and  the  weak  who  preach  arson,  dyna- 
mite, and  sabotage.  They  are  the  products  of  conditions 
such  as  existed  in  Colorado — as  Bakounin  was  the  prod- 
uct of  the  conditions  in  Russia.  These,  after  all,  are  rela- 
tively few,  and  their  power  is  almost  nothing.  They  are 
listened  to  now,  but  not  heeded,  because  there  yet  exist 
among  the  people  faith  in  the  ultimate  victory  of  peace- 
able means  and  the  hope  that  men  and  not  property  will 
one  day  rule  the  State.  The  other  set  of  anarchists  are 
those  powerful,  influential  terrorists  who  talk  hypocriti- 
cally of  their  devotion  to  the  State,  the  law,  the  Consti- 
tution, and  the  courts,  but  who,  when  the  slightest  ob- 
stacle stands  in  the  path  of  their  greed,  seize  from  their 
corrupt  tools  the  reins  of  government,  in  order  to  rule 
society  with  the  black-jack  and  the  "bull  pen."  The 
idealist  anarchist  and  even  the  more  practical  syndicalist, 
preaching  openly  and  frankly  that  there  is  nothing  left 
to  the  poor  but  war,  are,  after  all,  few  in  number  and 
weak  in  action.  Yet  how  many  to-day  despair  of  peace- 
able methods  when  they  see  all  these  outrages  committed 
by  mercenaries,  protected  and  abetted  by  the  official  State, 
in  the  interest  of  the  most  sordid  anarchism! 

As  a  matter  of  fact,  the  socialist  is  to-day  almost  alone, 
among  those  watching  intently  this  industrial  strife,  in 
keeping  buoyant  his  abiding  faith  in  the  ultimate  victory 
of  the  people.  He  has  fought  successfully  against  Ba- 
kounin.    He  is  overcoming  the  newest  anarchists,  and 


326      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

he  is  already  measuring  swords  with  the  oldest  anarchists. 
He  is  confident  as  to  the  issue.  He  has  more  than 
dreams  ;  he  knows,  and  has  all  the  comfort  of  that  knowl- 
edge, that  anarchy  in  government  like  anarchy  in  pro- 
duction is  reaching  the  end  of  its  rope.  Outlawry  for 
profit,  as  well  as  production  for  profit,  are  soon  to  be 
things  of  the  past.  The  socialist  feels  himself  a  part 
of  the  growing  power  that  is  soon  to  rule  society.  He 
is  conscious  of  being  an  agent  of  a  world-wide  move- 
ment that  is  massing  into  an  irresistible  human  force 
millions  upon  millions  of  the  disinherited.  He  has  un- 
bounded faith  that  through  that  mass  power  industry 
will  be  socialized  and  the  State  democratized.  No  longer 
will  its  use  be  merely  to  serve  and  promote  private  enter- 
prise in  foul  tenements,  in  sweatshops,  and  in  all  the 
products  that  are  necessary  to  life  and  to  death.  All 
these  vast  commercial  enterprises  that  exist  not  to  serve 
society  but  to  enrich  the  rich — including  even  this  sordid 
traffic  in  thuggery  and  in  murder — are  soon  to  pass  into 
history  as  part  of  a  terrible,  culminating  epoch  in  com- 
mercial, financial,'  and  political  anarchy.  The  socialist, 
who  sees  the  root  of  all  anti-social  individualism  in  the 
predominance  of  private  material  interests  over  com- 
munal material  interests,  knows  that  the  hour  is  arriving 
when  the  social  instincts  and  the  life  interests  of  prac- 
tically all  the  people  will  be  arrayed  against  anarchy  in  all 
its  forms.  Commerce  in  violence,  like  commerce  in  the 
necessaries  of  life,  is  but  a  part  of  a  social  regime  that 
is  disappearing,  and,  while  most  others  in  society  seem 
to  see  only  phases  of  this  gigantic  conflict  between  capital 
and  labor,  and,  while  most  others  look  upon  it  as  some- 
thing irremediable,  the  socialist,  standing  amidst  millions 
upon  millions  of  his  comrades,  is  even  now  beginning  to 
see  visions  of  victory. 


CHAPTER    XII 

VISIONS     OF     VICTORY 

We  left  the  socialists,  on  September  30,  1890,  in  the 
midst  of  jubilation  over  the  great  victory  they  had  just 
won  in  Germany.  The  Iron  Chancellor,  with  all  the 
power  of  State  and  society  in  his  hands,  had  capitulated 
before  the  moral  force  and  mass  power  of  the  German 
working  class.  And,  when  the  sensational  news  went  out 
to  all  countries  that  the  German  socialists  had  polled 
1,427,000  votes,  the  impulse  given  to  the  political  organ- 
izations of  the  working  class  was  immense.  Once  again 
the  thought  of  labor  throughout  the  world  was  centered 
upon  those  stirring  words  of  Marx  and  Engels :  "Work- 
ingmen  of  all  countries,  Unite!"  First  uttered  by  them 
in  '47,  repeated  in  '64,  and  pleaded  for  once  again  in  '72, 
this  call  to  unity  began  to  appear  in  the  nineties  as  the 
one  supreme  commandment  of  the  labor  movement.  And, 
in  truth,  it  is  an  epitome  of  all  their  teachings.  It  is 
the  pith  of  their  program  and  the  marrow  of  their  prin- 
ciples. Nearly  all  else  can  be  waived.  Other  principles 
can  be  altered ;  other  programs  abandoned ;  other  meth- 
ods revolutionized ;  but  this  principle,  program,  and 
method  must  not  be  tampered  with.  It  is  the  one  and 
only  unalterable  law.  In  unity,  and  in  unity  alone,  is 
the  power  of  salvation.  And  under  the  inspiration  of  this 
call  more  and  more  millions  have  come  together,  until 
to-day,  in  every  portion  of  the  world,  there  are  multitudes 
affiliated  to  the  one  and  only  international  army.    In  '47 

327 


328      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

it  was  not  yet  born.  In  '64  efforts  were  made  to  bring  it 
into  being.  In  '72  it  was  broken  into  fragments.  In  '90 
it  won  its  first  battle — its  right  to  exist.  Now,  twenty- 
three  years  later,  nothing  could  be  so  eloquent  and  im- 
pressive as  the  figures  themselves  of  the  rising  tide  of 
international  socialism. 

THE  SOCIALIST  AND  LABOR  VOTE,  1887-1913. 

1887        1892  1897  1903  1913 

Germany 763,000  1,786,000  2,107,000  3,010,000  4,250,329 

France 47,000     440,000     790,000     805,000  1,125,877 

Austria 750,000     780,000  1,081,441 

United  States....      2,000       21,000       55,000     223,494  931,406 

Italy 26,000      135,000     300,000  825,280 

Australia 678,012 

Belgium 320,000     457,000     464,000  (a)  600,000 

Great  Britain 55,000     100,000  373,645 

Finland 10,000  320,289 

Russia 200,000 

Sweden 723     10,000  170,299 

Norway 7,000       30,000  124,594 

Denmark 8,000       20,000       32,000       53,000  107,015 

Switzerland 2,000       39,000       40,000       70,000  105,000 

Holland 1,500     13,000       38,000  82,494 

New  Zealand 44,960 

Spain 5,000       14,000       23,000  40,725 

Bulgaria 25,565 

Argentina 54,000 

Chile 18,000 

Greece 26,000 

Canada 10,780 

Servia 9,000 

Luxembourg 4,000 

Portugal 3,308 

Roumania 2,057 


Total 823,500  2,657,723  4,455,000  5,916,494  11,214,076 

(a)  The  vote  for  Belgium  is  estimated.  The  Liberals  and  the 
Socialists  combined  at  the  last  election  in  opposition  to  the  Clericals, 
and  together  polled  over  1,200,000  votes.  The  British  Socialist 
Year  Book,  1913,  estimates  the  total  Socialist  vote  at  about  600,000. 

The  above  table  explains,  in  no  small  measure,  the 
quiet  patience  and  supreme  confidence  of  the  socialist. 


VISIONS  OF  VICTORY  329 

He  looks  upon  that  wonderful  array  of  figures  as  the  one 
most  significant  fact  in  the  modern  world.  Within  a 
quarter  of  a  century  his  force  has  grown  from  800,000 
to  11,000,000.  And,  while  no  other  movement  in  his- 
tory has  grown  so  rapidly  and  traversed  the  entire  world 
with  such  speed,  the  socialist  knows  that  even  this  table 
inadequately  indicates  his  real  power.  For  instance,  in 
Great  Britain  the  Labor  Party  has  over  one  million 
dues-paying  members,  yet  its  vote  is  here  placed  at  373,- 
645.  Owing  to  the  peculiar  political  conditions  existing  in 
that  country,  it  is  almost  impossible  for  the  Labor 
Party  to  put  up  its  candidates  in  all  districts,  and  these 
figures  include  only  that  small  proportion  of  workingmen 
who  have  been  able  to  cast  their  votes  for  their  own  can- 
didates. The  two  hundred  thousand  socialist  votes  in 
Russia  do  not  at  all  represent  the  sentiment  in  that  coun- 
try. Everything  there  militates  against  the  open  expres- 
sion, and,  indeed,  the  possibility  of  any  expression,  of 
the  actual  socialist  sentiment.  In  addition,  great  masses 
of  workingmen  in  many  countries  are  still  deprived  of 
the  suffrage,  and  in  nearly  all  countries  the  wives  of 
these  men  are  deprived  of  the  suffrage.  Leaving,  how- 
ever, all  this  aside,  and  taking  the  common  reckoning  of 
five  persons  to  each  voter,  the  socialist  strength  of  the 
world  to-day  cannot  be  estimated  at  less  than  fifty  mil- 
lion souls. 

Coming  to  the  parliamentary  strength  of  the  socialists, 
we  find  the  table  on  the  following  page  illuminating. 

It  appears  that  labor  is  in  control  of  Australia,  that  45 
per  cent,  of  the  Finnish  Parliament  is  socialist,  while  in 
Sweden  more  than  a  third,  and  in  Germany  and  Den- 
mark somewhat  less  than  a  third,  is  socialist.  In  several 
of  the  Northern  countries  of  Europe  the  parliamentary 
position  of  the  socialists  is  stronger  than  that  of  any 


330 


VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 


SOCIALIST  AND  LABOR  REPRESENTATIVES 
IN  PARLIAMENT. 

Number  of  Seats  Per 

in  Lower  House.  Cent. 

Total  Socialist.  Socialist 

Australia 75  41  54.61 

Finland 200  90  45.00 

Sweden 165  64  38.79 

Denmark 114  32  28.07 

Germany 397  110  27.71 

Belgium 186  39  20.96 

Norway 123  23  18.70 

Holland 100  17  17.00 

Austria 516  82  15.89 

Italy 508  78  15.35 

Luxembourg 53  7  13.21 

France 597  75  12.56 

Switzerland 170  15  8.82 

Great  Britain 670  41  6.12 

Russia 442  16  3.62 

Greece 207  -      4  2.00 

Argentina 120  2  1.67 

Servia 160  1  .62 

Portugal 164  1  -61 

Bulgaria 189  1  -53 

Spain 404  1  -25 


other  single  party.  In  addition  to  the  representatives 
here  listed,  Belgium  has  seven  senators,  Denmark  four, 
and  Sweden  twelve,  while  in  the  state  legislatures  Austria 
has  thirty-one,  Germany  one  hundred  and  eighty-five,  and 
the  United  States  twenty.  Here  again  the  strength  of 
socialism  is  greatly  understated.  In  the  United  States, 
for  instance,  the  astonishing  fact  appears  that,  with  a 
vote  of  nearly  a  million,  the  socialist  party  has  not  one 
representative  in  Congress.  On  the  basis  of  proportional 
representation  it  would  have  at  least  twenty-five  Con- 
gressmen ;  and,  if  it  were  a  sectional  party,  it  could,  with 
its  million  votes,  control  all  the  Southern  states  and  elect 
every  Congressman  and  Senator  from  those  states.    The 


VISIONS  OF  VICTORY  33 1 

socialists  in  the  German  Reichstag  are  numerous,  but  on 
a  fair  system  of  representation  they  would  have  two  or 
three  score  more  representatives  than  at  present.  How- 
ever, this,  too,  is  of  little  consequence,  and  in  no  wise 
disturbs  the  thoughtful  socialist.  The  immense  progress 
of  his  cause  completely  satisfies  him,  and,  if  the  rate 
of  advance  continues,  it  can  be  only  a  few  years  until  a 
world  victory  is  at  hand. 

If,  now,  we  turn  from  the  political  aspects  of  the  labor 
movement  to  examine  the  growth  of  cooperatives  and  of 
trade  unions,  we  find  a  progress  no  less  striking.  In 
actual  membership  the  trade  unions  of  twenty  nations  in 
191 1  had  amassed  over  eleven  million  men  and  women. 
And  the  figures  sent  out  by  the  international  secretary 
do  not  include  countries  so  strongly  organized  as  Canada, 
New  Zealand,  and  Australia.  Unfortunately,  it  is  im- 
possible to  add  here  reliable  figures  regarding  the  wealth 
of  the  great  and  growing  cooperative  movement.  In 
Britain,  Germany,  Belgium,  France,  Italy,  and  Switzer- 
land, as  well  as  in  the  Northern  countries  of  Central 
Europe,  the  cooperative  movement  has  made  enormous 
headway  in  recent  years.  The  British  cooperators,  ac- 
cording to  the  report  of  the  Federation  of  Cooperative 
Societies,  had  in  1912  a  turnover  amounting  to  over  six 
hundred  millions  of  dollars.  They  have  over  twenty- 
four  hundred  stores  scattered  throughout  the  cities  of 
Great  Britain.  The  Cooperative  Productive  Society  and 
the  Cooperative  Wholesale  Society  produced  goods  in 
their  own  shops  to  a  value  of  over  sixty-five  millions  of 
dollars ;  while  the  goods  produced  by  the  Cooperative 
Provision  Stores  amounted  to  over  forty  million  dollars. 
Seven  hundred  and  sixty  societies  have  Children's  Penny 
Banks,  with  a  total  balance  in  hand  of  about  eight  mil- 
lion dollars.     The  members  of  these  various  cooperative 


332       VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

societies  number  approximately  three  million.*  Through- 
out all  Europe,  through  cooperative  effort,  there  have 
been  erected  hundreds  of  splendid  "Houses  of  the  Peo- 
ple," "Labor  Temples,"  and  similar  places  of  meeting 
and  recreation.  The  entire  labor,  socialist,  and  coopera- 
tive press,  numbering  many  thousands  of  monthly  and 
weekly  journals,  and  hundreds  of  daily  papers,  is  also 
usually  owned  cooperatively.  Unfortunately,  the  statis- 
tics dealing  with  this  phase  of  the  labor  movement  have 
never  been  gathered  with  any  idea  of  completeness,  and 
there  is  little  use  in  trying  even  to  estimate  the  immense 
wealth  that  is  now  owned  by  these  organizations  of  work- 
ingmen. 

America  lags  somewhat  behind  the  other  countries, 
but  nowhere  else  have  such  difficulties  faced  the  labor 
movement.  With  a  working  class  made  up  of  many  races, 
nationalities,  and  creeds,  trade-union  organization  is  ex- 
cessively difficult.  Moreover,  where  the  railroads  secretly 
rebate  certain  industries  and  help  to  destroy  the  competi- 
tors of  those  industries,  and  where  the  trusts  exercise 
enormous  power,  a  cooperative  movement  is  well-nigh 
impossible.  Furthermore,  where  vast  numbers  of  the 
working  class  are  still  disfranchised,  and  where  elections 
are  notoriously  corrupt  and  more  or  less  under  the  con- 
trol of  a  hireling  class  of  professional  political  manipula- 
tors, an  independent  political  movement  faces  almost  in- 
surmountable obstacles.  Nor  is  this  all.  No  other 
country  allows  its  ruling  classes  to  employ  private  armies, 
thugs,  and  assassins  ;  and  no  other  country  makes  such  an 
effort  to  prevent  the  working  classes  from  acting  peace- 
ably and  legally.  While  nearly  everywhere  else  the 
unions  may  strike,  picket,  and  boycott,  in  America  there 

*  Above  data  taken  from  International  News  Letter  of   Na- 
tional Trade  Union  Centers,  Berlin,  May  30,  1913. 


VISIONS  OF  VICTORY 


3Z'6 


are  laws  to  prevent  both  picketing  and  boycotting,  and 
even  some  forms  of  strikes.  The  most  extraordinary 
despotic  judicial  powers  are  exercised  to  crush  the  unions, 
to  break  strikes,  and  to  imprison  union  men.  And,  if 
paid  professional  armies  of  detectives  deal  with  the 
unions,  so  paid  professional  armies  of  politicians  deal 
with  the  socialists.  By  every  form  of  debauchery,  law- 
lessness, and  corruption  they  are  beaten  back,  and,  al- 
though it  is  absolutely  incredible,  not  a  single  representa- 
tive of  a  great  party  polling  nearly  a  million  votes  sits 
in  the  Congress  of  the  United  States. 

Nevertheless,  the  American  socialist  and  labor  move- 
ment is  making  headway,  and  the  day  is  not  far  distant 
when  it  will  exercise  the  power  its  strength  merits.  Al- 
though somewhat  more  belated,  the  various  elements  of 
the  working  class  are  coming  closer  and  closer  together, 
and  it  cannot  be  long  until  there  will  be  perfect  harmony 
throughout  the  entire  movement.  In  many  other  coun- 
tries this  harmony  already  exists.  The  trade-union,  co- 
operative, and  socialist  movements  are  so  closely  tied 
together  that  they  move  in  every  industrial,  political,  and 
commercial  conflict  in  complete  accord.  So  far  as  the 
immediate  aims  of  labor  are  concerned,  they  may  be 
said  to  be  almost  identical  in  all  countries.  Professor 
Werner  Sombart,  who  for  years  has  watched  the  world 
movement  more  carefully  perhaps  than  anyone  else,  has 
pointed  out  that  there  is  a  strong  tendency  to  uniformity 
in  all  countries — a  "tendency,"  in  his  own  words,  "of 
the  movement  in  all  lands  toward  socialism."  (i)  In- 
deed, nothing  so  much  astonishes  careful  observers  of 
the  labor  movement  as  the  extraordinary  rapidity  with 
which  the  whole  world  of  labor  is  becoming  unified,  in 
its  program  of  principles,  in  its  form  of  organization, 
and  in  its  methods  of  action.    The  books  of  Marx  and 


334      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

Engels  are  now  translated  into  every  important  language 
and  are  read  with  eagerness  in  all  parts  of  the  world. 
The  Communist  Manifesto  of  1847  *s  issued  by  the 
socialist  parties  of  all  countries  as  the  text-book  of  the 
movement.  Indeed,  it  is  not  uncommon  nowadays  to  see 
a  socialist  book  translated  immediately  into  all  the  chief 
languages  and  circulated  by  millions  of  copies.  And,  if 
one  will  take  up  the  political  programs  of  the  party 
in  the  twenty  chief  nations  of  the  world,  he  will  find  them 
reading  almost  word  for  word  alike.  For  these  various 
reasons  no  informed  person  to-day  questions  the  claims 
of  the  socialist  as  to  the  international,  world-wide  char- 
acter of  the  movement. 

Perhaps  there  is  no  experience  quite  like  that  of  the 
socialist  who  attends  one  of  the  great  periodical  gather- 
ings of  the  international  movement.  He  sees  there  a 
thousand  or  more  delegates,  with  credentials  from  organi- 
zations numbering  approximately  ten  million  adherents. 
They  come  from  all  parts  of  the  world — from  mills, 
mines,  factories,  and  fields — to  meet  together,  and,  in 
the  recent  congresses,  to  pass  in  utmost  harmony  their 
resolutions  in  opposition  to  the  existing  regime  and  their 
suggestions  for  remedial  action.  Not  only  the  countries 
of  Western  Europe,  but  Russia,  Japan,  China,  and  the 
South  American  Republics  send  their  representatives,  and, 
although  the  delegates  speak  as  many  as  thirty  different 
languages,  they  manage  to  assemble  in  a  common  meeting, 
and,  with  hardly  a  dissenting  voice,  transact  their  busi- 
ness. When  we  consider  all  the  jealousy,  rivalry,  and 
hatred  that  have  been  whipped  up  for  hundreds  of  years 
among  the  peoples  of  the  various  nations,  races,  and 
creeds,  these  international  congresses  of  workingmen  be- 
come in  themselves  one  of  the  greatest  achievements  of 
modern  times. 


VISIONS  OF  VICTORY  335 

Although  Marx  was,  as  I  think  I  have  made  clear,  and 
still  is,  the  guiding  spirit  of  modern  socialism,  the  huge 
structure  of  the  present  labor  movement  has  not  been 
erected  by  any  great  architect  who  saw  it  all  in  ad- 
vance, nor  has  any  great  leader  molded  its  varied  and 
wonderful  lines.  It  is  the  work  of  a  multitude,  who  have 
quarreled  among  themselves  at  every  stage  of  its  build- 
ing. They  differed  as  to  the  purpose  of  the  structure,  as 
to  the  materials  to  be  used,  and,  indeed,  upon  every  de- 
tail, big  and  little,  that  has  had  to  do  with  it.  At  times 
all  building  has  been  stopped  in  order  that  the  different 
views  might  be  harmonized  or  the  quarrels  fought  to  a 
finish.  Again  and  again  portions  have  been  built  only  to 
be  torn  down  and  thrown  aside.  Some  have  seen  more 
clearly  than  others  the  work  to  be  done,  and  one,  at  least, 
of  the  architects  must  be  recognized  as  a  kind  of  prophet 
who,  in  the  main,  outlined  the  structure.  But  the  archi- 
tects were  not  the  builders,  and  among  the  multitude  en- 
gaged in  that  work  there  have  been  years  of  quarrels  and 
decades  of  strife.  The  story  of  terrorism,  as  told,  is 
that  of  a  group  who  had  no  conception  of  the  structure  to 
be  erected.  They  were  a  band  of  dissidents,  without 
patience  to  build.  They  and  their  kind  have  never  been 
absent  from  the  labor  movement,  and,  in  fact,  for  nearly 
one  hundred  years  a  battle  has  raged  in  one  form  or 
another  between  those  few  of  the  workers  who  were 
urging,  with  passionate  fire,  what  they  called  "action" 
and  that  multitude  of  others  who  day  and  night  were 
laying  stone  upon  stone. 

No  individual — in  fact,  nothing  but  a  force  as  strong 
and  compelling  as  a  natural  law — could  have  brought 
into  existence  such  a  vast  solidarity  as  now  exists  in  the 
world  of  labor.  Like  food  and  drink,  the  organization 
of   labor  satisfies  an  inherent  necessity.     The  workers 


336      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

crave  its  protection,  seek  its  guidance,  and  possess  a 
sense  of  security  only  when  supported  by  its  solidarity. 
Only  something  as  intuitively  impelling  as  the  desire  for 
life  could  have  called  forth  the  labor  and  love  and  sacri- 
fice that  have  been  lavishly  expended  in  the  dishearten- 
ing and  incredibly  tedious  work  of  labor  organization. 
The  upbuilding  of  the  labor  movement  has  seemed  at 
times  like  constructing  a  house  of  cards :  often  it  was 
hardly  begun  before  some  ill  wind  cast  it  down.  It  has 
cost  many  of  its  creators  exile,  imprisonment,  starvation, 
and  death.  With  one  mighty  assault  its  opponents  have 
often  razed  to  the  ground  the  work  of  years.  Yet,  as 
soon  as  the  eyes  of  its  destroyers  were  turned,  a  multi- 
tude of  loving  hands  and  broken  hearts  set  to  work  to 
patch  up  its  scattered  fragments  and  build  it  anew.  The 
labor  movement  is  unconquerable. 

Unlike  many  other  aggregations,  associations,  and 
benevolent  orders,  unlike  the  Church,  to  which  it  is  fre- 
quently compared,  the  labor  movement  is  not  a  purely 
voluntary  union.  No  doubt  there  is  a  camaraderie  in 
that  movement,  and  unquestionably  the  warmest  spirit  of 
fellowship  often  prevails,  but  the  really  effective  cause 
for  working-class  unity  is  economic  necessity.  The  work- 
ers have  been  driven  together.  The  unions  subsist  not 
because  of  leaders  and  agitators,  but  because  of  the  com- 
pelling economic  interests  of  their  members.  They  are 
efforts  to  allay  the  deadly  strife  among  workers,  as  or- 
ganizations of  capital  are  efforts  to  allay  the  deadly  strife 
among  capitalists.  The  cooperative  movement  has  grown 
into  a  vast  commerce  wholly  because  it  served  the  self- 
interest  of  the  workers.  The  trade  unions  have  grown 
big  in  all  countries  because  of  the  protection  they  offer 
and  the  insurance  they  provide  against  low  wages,  long 
hours,  and  poverty.     The  socialist  parties  have  grown 


VISIONS  OF  VICTORY  337 

great  because  they  express  the  highest  social  aspirations 
of  the  workers  and  their  antagonism  toward  the  present 
regime.  Moreover,  they  offer  an  opportunity  to  put  for- 
ward, in  the  most  authoritative  places,  the  demands  of 
the  workers  for  political,  social,  and  economic  reform. 
The  whole  is  a  struggle  for  democracy,  both  political  and 
industrial,  that  is  by  no  means  founded  merely  on  whim 
or  caprice.  It  has  gradually  become  a  religion,  an  im- 
perative religion,  of  millions  of  workingmen  and  women. 
Chiefly  because  of  their  economic  subjection,  they  are 
striving  in  the  most  heroic  manner  to  make  their  voice 
heard  in  those  places  where  the  rules  of  the  game  of  life 
are  decided.  Thus,  every  phase  of  the  labor  movement 
has  arisen  in  response  to  actual  material  needs. 

And,  if  the  labor  movement  has  arisen  in  response  to 
actual  material  needs,  it  is  now  a  very  great  and  material 
actuality.  The  workingmen  of  the  world  are,  as  we 
have  seen,  uniting  at  a  pace  so  rapid  as  to  be  almost 
unbelievable.  There  are  to-day  not  only  great  national 
organizations  of  labor  in  nearly  every  country,  but  these 
national  movements  are  bound  closely  together  into  one 
unified  international  power.  The  great  world-wide  move- 
ment of  labor,  which  Marx  and  Engels  prophesied  would 
come,  is  now  here.  And,  if  they  were  living  to-day,  they 
could  not  but  be  astonished  at  the  real  and  mighty  mani- 
festation of  their  early  dreams.  To  be  sure,  Engels  lived 
long  enough  to  be  jubilant  over  the  massing  of  labor's 
forces,  but  Marx  saw  little  of  it,  and  even  the  German 
socialists,  who  started  out  so  brilliantly,  were  at  the  time 
of  his  death  fighting  desperately  for  existence  under  the 
anti-socialist  law.  Indeed,  in  1883,  the  year  of  his  death, 
the  labor  movement  was  still  torn  by  quarrels  and  dissen- 
sions over  problems  of  tactics,  and  in  America,  France, 
and  Austria  the  terrorists  were  more  active  than  at  any 


338       VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

time  in  their  history.  It  was  still  a  question  whether  the 
German  movement  could  survive,  while  in  the  other  coun- 
tries the  socialists  were  still  little  more  than  sects.  That 
was  just  thirty  years  ago,  while  to-day,  as  we  have  seen, 
over  ten  millions  of  workingmen,  scattered  throughout 
the  entire  world,  fight  every  one  of  their  battles  on  the 
lines  laid  down  by  Marx.  The  tactics  and  principles  he 
outlined  are  now  theirs.  The  unity  of  the  workers  he 
pleaded  for  is  rapidly  being  achieved  throughout  the  en- 
tire world,  and  everywhere  these  armies  are  marching 
toward  the  goal  made  clear  by  his  life  and  labor.  "Al- 
though I  have  seen  him  to-night,"  writes  Engels  to  Lieb- 
knecht,  March  14,  1883,  "stretched  out  on  his  bed,  the 
face  rigid  in  death,  I  cannot  grasp  the  thought  that  this 
genius  should  have  ceased  to  fertilize  with  his  powerful 
thoughts  the  proletarian  movement  of  both  worlds. 
Whatever  we  all  are,  we  are  through  him ;  and  whatever 
the  movement  of  to-day  is,  it  is  through  his  theoretical 
and  practical  work ;  without  him  we  should  still  be  stuck 
in  the  mire  of  confusion."  (2) 

What  was  this  mire?  If  we  will  cast  our  eyes  back 
to  the  middle  of  last  century  we  cannot  but  realize  that 
the  ideas  of  the  world  have  undergone  a  complete  revolu- 
tion. When  Marx  began  his  work  with  the  labor  move- 
ment there  was  absolute  ignorance  among  both  masters 
and  men  concerning  the  nature  of  capitalism.  It  was  a 
great  and  terrible  enigma  which  no  one  understood. 
The  working  class  itself  was  broken  up  into  innumerable 
guerilla  bands  fighting  hopelessly,  aimlessly,  with  the  most 
antiquated  and  ineffectual  weapons.  They  were  in  mis- 
ery ;  but  why,  they  knew  not.  They  left  their  v/ork  to  riot 
for  days  and  weeks,  without  aim  and  without  purpose. 
They  were  bitter  and  sullen.  They  smashed  machines 
and  burned  factories,  chiefly  because  they  were  totally 


VISIONS  OF  VICTORY  339 

ignorant  of  the  causes  of  their  misery  or  of  the  nature 
of  their  real  antagonist.  Not  seldom  in  those  days  there 
were  meetings  of  hundreds  of  thousands  of  laborers,  and 
not  infrequently  mysterious  epidemics  of  fires  and  of  ma- 
chine-breaking occurred  throughout  all  the  factory  dis- 
tricts. Again  and  again  the  soldiers  were  brought  out 
to  massacre  the  laborers.  In  all  England — then  the  most 
advanced  industrially — there  were  few  who  understood 
capitalism,  and  among  masters  or  men  there  was  hardly 
one  who  knew  the  real  source  of  all  the  immense,  intoler- 
able economic  evils. 

The  class  struggle  was  there,  and  it  was  being  fought 
more  furiously  and  violently  than  ever  before  or  since. 
The  most  striking  rebels  of  the  time  were  those  that 
Marx  called  the  "bourgeois  democrats."  They  were  for- 
ever preaching  open  and  violent  revolution.  They  were 
dreaming  of  the  glorious  day  when,  amid  insurrection 
and  riot,  they  should  stand  at  the  barricades,  fighting  the 
battle  for  freedom.  In  their  little  circles  they  "were  lay- 
ing plans  for  the  overthrow  of  the  world  and  intoxicating 
themselves  day  by  day,  evening  by  evening,  with  the 
hasheesh-drink  of:  'To-morrow  it  will  start;'  "  (3)  Be- 
fore and  after  the  revolutionary  period  of  '48  there  were 
innumerable  thousands  of  these  fugitives,  exiles,  and  men 
of  action  obsessed  with  the  dream  that  a  great  revolu- 
tionary cataclysm  was  soon  to  occur  which  would  lay  in 
ruins  the  old  society.  That  a  crisis  was  impending  every- 
one believed,  including  even  Marx  and  Engels.  In  fact, 
for  over  twenty  years,  from  1847  to  1871,  the  "extempor- 
izers  of  revolutions"  fretfully  awaited  the  supreme  hour. 
Toward  the  end  of  the  period  appeared  Bakounin  and 
Nechayeff  with  their  robber  worship,  conspiratory  secret 
societies,  and  international  network  of  revolutionists. 
Wherever  capitalism  made  headway  the  workers  grew 


340       VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

more  and  more  rebellious,  but  neither  they  nor  those  who 
sought  to  lead  them,  and  often  did,  in  fact,  lead  them, 
had  much  of  any  program  beyond  destruction.  Bakou- 
nin  was  not  far  wrong,  at  the  time,  in  thinking  that  he 
was  "spreading  among  the  masses  ideas  corresponding 
to  the  instincts  of  the  masses,"  (4)  when  he  advocated 
the  destruction  of  the  Government,  the  Church,  the  mills, 
the  factories,  and  the  palaces,  to  the  end  that  "not  a  stone 
should  be  left  upon  a  stone." 

This  was  the  mire  of  confusion  that  Engels  speaks  of. 
There  was  not  one  with  any  program  at  all  adequate  to 
meet  the  problem.  The  aim  of  the  rebels  went  little  be- 
yond retaliation  and  destruction.  What  were  the  weapons 
employed  by  the  warriors  of  this  period  ?  Street  riots  and 
barricades  were  those  of  the  "bourgeois  democrats"; 
strikes,  machine-breaking,  and  incendiarism  were  those  of 
the  workers;  and  later  the  terrorists  came  with  their 
robber  worship  and  Propaganda  of  the  Deed.  In  the 
midst  of  this  veritable  passion  for  destruction  Marx  and 
Engels  found  themselves.  Here  was  a  period  when  direct 
action  was  supreme.  There  was  nothing  else,  and  no 
one  dreamed  of  anything  else.  The  enemies  of  the  exist- 
ing order  were  employing  exactly  the  same  means  and 
methods  used  by  the  upholders  of  that  order.  Among 
the  workers,  for  instance,  the  only  weapons  used  were 
general  strikes,  boycotts,  and  what  is  now  called  sabotage. 
These  were  wholly  imitative  and  retaliative.  It  is  clear 
that  the  strike  is,  after  all,  only  an  inverted  lockout; 
and  as  early  as  1833  a  general  strike  was  parried  by  a 
general  lockout.  The  boycott  is  identical  with  the  black- 
list. The  employer  boycotts  union  leaders  and  union 
men.  The  employees  boycott  the  non-union  products  of 
the  employer;  while  sabotage,  the  most  ancient  weapon 
of  labor,  answers  poor  pay  with  poor  work,  and  broken 


VISIONS  OF  VICTORY  341 

machines  for  broken  lives.  And,  if  the  working  class 
was  striking  back  with  the  same  weapons  that  were  being 
used  against  it,  so,  too,  were  the  "pan-destroyers,"  ex- 
cept  that  for  the  most  part  their  weapons  were  incredibly- 
inadequate  and  ridiculous.  Sticks  and  stones  and  barri- 
cades were  their  method  of  combating  rifles  and  trained 
armies.  All  this  again  is  more  evidence  of  the  mire  of 
confusion. 

However,  if  the  weapons  of  the  rebellious  were  utterly 
futile  and  ineffectual,  there  were  no  others,  for  every 
move  the  workers  or  their  friends  made  was  considered 
lawless.  All  political  and  trades  associations  were  against 
the  law.  Peaceable  assembly  was  sedition.  Strikes  were 
treason.  Picketing  was  intimidation  ;  and  the  boycott  was 
conspiracy  in  restraint  of  trade.  Such  associations  as 
existed  were  forced  to  become  secret  societies,  and,  even 
if  a  working-class  newspaper  appeared,  it  was  almost  im- 
mediately suppressed.  And,  if  all  forms  of  trade-union 
activity  were  criminal,  political  activity  was  impossible 
where  the  vast  majority  of  toilers  had  no  votes.  With 
methods  mainly  imitative,  retaliative,  and  revengeful ; 
with  no  program  of  what  was  wanted ;  in  total  ignorance 
of  the  causes  of  their  misery;  and  with  little  appreciation 
that  in  unity  there  is  strength,  the  workers  and  their 
friends,  in  the  middle  of  the  last  century,  were  stuck  in 
the  mire — of  ignorance,  helplessness,  and  confusion. 

This  was  the  world  in  which  Marx  and  Engels  began 
their  labor.  Direct  action  was  at  its  zenith,  and  the 
struggle  of  the  classes  was  ferocious.  Indeed,  all  Europe 
was  soon  to  see  barricades  in  every  city,  and  thrones  and 
governments  tumbling  into  apparent  ruin.  Yet  in  the 
midst  of  all  this  wild  confusion,  and  even  touching  el- 
bows with  the  leaders  of  these  revolutionary  storms, 
Marx  and  Engels  outlined  in  clear,  simple,  and  powerful 


342       VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

language  the  nature  of  capitalism — what  it  was,  how  it 
came  into  being,  and  what  it  was  yet  destined  to  be- 
come. They  pointed  out  that  it  was  not  individual  em- 
ployers or  individual  statesmen  or  the  Government  or 
even  kings  and  princes  who  were  responsible  for  the  evils 
of  society,  but  that  unemployment,  misery,  and  oppres- 
sion were  due  to  an  economic  system,  and  that  so  long 
as  capitalism  existed  the  mass  of  humanity  would  be  sunk 
in  poverty.  They  called  attention  to  the  long  evolutionary 
processes  that  had  been  necessary  to  change  the  entire 
world  from  a  state  of  feudalism  into  a  state  of  capitalism ; 
and  how  it  was  not  due  to  man's  will-power  that  the 
great  industrial  revolution  occurred,  but  to  the  growth  of 
machines,  of  steam,  and  of  electrical  power;  and  that  it 
was  these  that  have  made  the  modern  world,  with  its 
intense  and  terrible  contrasts  of  riches  and  of  poverty. 
They  also  pointed  out  that  little  individual  owners  of 
property  were  giving  way  to  joint-stock  companies,  and 
that  these  would  in  turn  give  way  to  even  greater  aggre- 
gations of  capital.  An  economic  law  was  driving  the 
big  capitalists  to  eat  up  the  little  capitalists.  It  was 
forcing  them  to  take  from  the  workers  their  hand  tools 
and  to  drive  them  out  of  their  home  workshops ;  it  was 
forcing  them  also  to  take  from  the  small  property  owners 
their  little  properties  and  to  appropriate  the  wealth  of  the 
world  into  their  own  hands.  As  a  result  of  this  eco- 
nomic process,  "private  property,"  they  said,  "is  already 
done  away  with  for  nine-tenths  of  the  population."  (5) 
But  they  also  pointed  out  that  capitalism  had  within  itself 
the  seeds  of  its  own  dissolution,  that  it  was  creating 
a  new  class,  made  up  of  the  overwhelming  majority,  that 
was  destined  in  time  to  overthrow  capitalism.  "What  the 
bourgeoisie  therefore  produces,  above  all,  are  its  own 
grave  diggers."  (6)    In  the  interest  of  society  the  nine- 


VISIONS  OF  VICTORY  343 

tenths  would  force  the  one-tenth  to  yield  up  its  private 
property,  that  is  to  say,  its  "power  to  subjugate  the  labor 
of  others."  (7) 

Taking  their  stand  on  this  careful  analysis  of  historic 
progress  and  of  economic  evolution,  they  viewed  with 
contempt  the  older  fighting  methods  of  the  revolutionists, 
and  turned  their  vials  of  satire  and  wrath  upon  Her- 
wegh,  Willich,  Schapper,  Kinkel,  Ledru-Rollin,  Bakou- 
nin,  and  all  kinds  and  species  of  revolution-makers. 
They  deplored  incendiarism,  machine  destruction,  and  all 
the  purely  retaliative  acts  of  the  laborers.  They  even 
ridiculed  the  general  strike.*  And,  while  for  thirty  years 
they  assailed  anarchists,  terrorists,  and  direct-actionists, 
they  never  lost  an  opportunity  to  impress  upon  the  work- 
ers of  Europe  the  only  possible  method  of  effectually 
combating  capitalism.  There  must  first  be  unity — world- 
wide, international  unity — among  all  the  forces  of  labor. 
And,  secondly,  all  the  energies  of  a  united  labor  move- 
ment must  be  centered  upon  the  all-important  contest 
for  control  of  political  power.  They  fought  incessantly 
with  their  pens  to  bring  home  the  great  truth  that 
every  class  struggle  is  a  political  struggle ;  and,  while 
they  were  working  to  emphasize  that  fact,  they  began  in 
1864  actually  to  organize  the  workers  of  Europe  to  fight 
that  struggle.  The  first  great  practical  work  of  the  In- 
ternational was  to  get  votes  for  workingmen.  It  was 
the  chief  thought  and  labor  of  Marx  during  the  first 

*  "The  general  strike,"  Engels  said,  "is  in  Bakounin's  pro- 
gram the  lever  which  must  be  applied  in  order  to  inaugurate  the 
social  revolution.  .  .  .  The  proposition  is  far  from  being 
new;  some  French  socialists,  and,  after  them,  some  Belgian 
socialists  have  since  1848  shown  a  partiality  for  riding  this 
beast  of  parade."  This  appeared  in  a  series  of  articles  written 
for  Der  Volksstaat  in  1873  and  republished  in  the  pamphlet 
"Bakunisten  an  der  Arbeit." 


344 


VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 


years  of  that  organization  to  win  for  the  English  workers 
the  suffrage,  while  in  Germany  all  his  followers — includ- 
ing Lassalle  as  well  as  Bebel  and  Liebknecht — labored 
throughout  the  sixties  to  that  end.  Up  to  the  present  the 
main  work  of  the  socialist  movement  throughout  the 
world  has  been  to  fight  for,  and  its  main  achievement  to 
obtain,  the  legal  weapons  essential  for  its  battles. 

Let  us  try  to  grasp  the  immensity  of  the  task  actually 
executed  by  Marx.  First,  consider  his  scientific  work. 
During  all  the  period  of  these  many  battles  every  leisure 
moment  was  spent  in  study.  While  others  were  engaged 
in  organizing  what  they  were  pleased  to  call  the  "Revolu- 
tion" and  waiting  about  for  it  to  start,  Marx,  Engels, 
Liebknecht,  and  all  this  group  were  spending  innumerable 
hours  in  the  library.  We  see  the  result  of  that  labor  in 
the  three  great  volumes  of  "Capital,"  in  many  pamphlets, 
and  in  other  writings.  By  this  painstaking  scientific  work 
of  Marx  the  nature  of  capitalism  was  made  known  and, 
consequently,  what  it  was  that  should  be  combated,  and 
how  the  battle  should  be  waged.  In  addition  to  these 
studies,  which  have  been  of  such  priceless  value  to  the 
labor  and  socialist  movements  of  the  world,  Marx,  by  his 
pitiless  logic  and  incessant  warfare,  destroyed  every  revo- 
lution-maker, and  then,  by  an  act  of  surgery  that  many 
declared  would  prove  fatal,  cut  out  of  the  labor  move- 
ment the  "pan-destroyers."  Once  more,  by  a  supreme 
effort,  he  turned  the  thought  of  labor  throughout  the 
world  to  the  one  end  and  aim  of  winning  its  political 
weapons,  of  organizing  its  political  armies,  and  of  uniting 
the  working  classes  of  all  lands.  Here,  then,  is  a  brief 
summary  of  the  work  of  this  genius,  who  fertilized  with 
his  powerful  thoughts  the  proletarian  movements  of  both 
worlds.  The  most  wonderful  thing  of  all  is  that,  in  his 
brief  lifetime,  he  should  not  only  have  planned  this  gigan- 


VISIONS  OF  VICTORY  345 

tic  task,  but  that  he  should  have  obtained  the  essentials 
for  its  complete  accomplishment. 

And,  as  we  look  out  upon  the  world  to-day,  we  find 
it  actually  a  different  world,  almost  a  new  world.  The 
present-day  conflict  between  capital  and  labor  has  no 
more  the  character  of  the  guerilla  warfare  of  half  a 
century  ago.  It  is  now  a  struggle  between  immense 
organizations  of  capital  and  immense  organizations  of 
labor.  And  not  only  has  there  been  a  revolution  in  ideas 
concerning  the  nature  of  capitalism  but  there  has  been 
as  a  consequence  a  revolution  in  the  methods  of  combat 
between  labor  and  capital.  While  all  the  earlier  and 
more  brutal  forms  of  warfare  are  still  used,  the  conflict 
as  a  whole  is  to-day  conducted  on  a  different  plane. 
The  struggle  of  the  classes  is  no  longer  a  vague,  unde- 
fined, and  embittered  battle.  It  is  no  longer  merely  a 
contest  between  the  violent  of  both  classes.  It  is  now 
a  deliberate,  and  largely  legal,  tug-of-war  between  two 
great  social  categories  over  the  ends  of  a  social  revolution 
that  both  are  beginning  to  recognize  as  inevitable.  The 
representative  workers  to-day  understand  capitalism,  and 
labor  now  faces  capital  with  a  program,  clear,  comprehen- 
sive, world-changing;  with  an  international  army  of  so 
many  millions  that  it  is  almost  past  contending  with ; 
while  its  tactics  and  methods  of  action  can  neither  be 
assailed  nor  effectively  combated.  From  one  end  of  the 
earth  to  the  other  we  see  capital  with  its  gigantic  asso- 
ciations of  bankers,  merchants,  manufacturers,  mine  own- 
ers, and  mill  owners  striving  to  forward  and  to  protect 
its  economic  interests.  On  the  other  hand,  we  see  labor 
with  its  millions  upon  millions  of  organized  men  all  but 
united  and  solidified  under  the  flag  of  international 
socialism. 

And,  most  strange  and  wondrous  of  all — as  a  result  of 


346      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

the  logic  of  things  and  of  the  logic  of  Marx — the  actual 
positions  of  the  two  classes  have  been  completely  trans- 
posed. Marx  persuaded  the  workers  to  take  up  a  weapon 
which  they  alone  can  use.  Like  Siegfried,  they  have 
taken  the  fragments  of  a  sword  and  welded  them  into 
a  mighty  weapon — so  mighty,  indeed,  that  the  working 
class  alone,  with  its  innumerable  millions,  is  capable  of 
wielding  it.  The  workers  are  the  only  class  in  society 
with  the  numerical  strength  to  become  the  majority  and 
the  only  class  which,  by  unity  and  organization,  can  em- 
ploy the  suffrage  effectively.  While  fifty  years  ago  the 
workers  had  every  legal  and  peaceable  means  denied 
them,  to-day  they  are  the  only  class  which  can  assuredly 
profit  through  legal  and  peaceable  means.  It  is  obvious 
that  the  beneficiaries  of  special  privilege  can  hope  to  re- 
tain their  power  only  so  long  as  the  working  class  is 
divided  and  too  ignorant  to  recognize  its  own  interests. 
As  soon  as  its  eyes  open,  the  privileged  classes  must  lose 
its  political  support  and,  with  that  political  support,  every- 
thing else.  That  is  absolutely  inevitable.  The  interests 
of  mass  and  class  are  too  fundamentally  opposed  to  per- 
mit of  permanent  political  harmony. 

Nobody  sees  this  more  clearly  than  the  intelligent  capi- 
talist. As  the  workers  become  more  and  more  conscious 
of  their  collective  power  and  more  and  more  convinced 
that  through  solidarity  they  can  quietly  take  possession 
of  the  world,  their  opponents  become  increasingly  con- 
scious of  their  growing  weakness,  and  already  in  Europe 
there  is  developing  a  kind  of  upper-class  syndicalism,  that 
despairs  of  Parliaments,  deplores  the  bungling  work  of 
politics,  and  ridicules  the  general  incompetence  of  demo- 
cratic institutions.  At  the  same  time,  however,  they 
exercise  stupendous  efforts,  in  the  most  devious  and 
questionable  ways,  to  retain  their  political  power.    Facing 


VISIONS  OF  VICTORY  347 

the  inevitable,  and  realizing  that  potentially  at  least  the 
suffrages  of  the  immense  majority  stand  over  them  as  a 
menace,  they  are  beginning  to  seek  other  methods  of 
action.  Of  course,  in  all  the  more  democratic  countries 
the  power  of  democracy  has  already  made  itself  felt,  and 
in  America,  at  any  rate,  the  powerful  have  long  had  re- 
sort to  bribery,  corruption,  and  all  sorts  of  political  con- 
spiracy in  order  to  retain  their  power.  Much  as  we  may 
deplore  the  debauchery  of  public  servants,  it  nevertheless 
yields  us  a  certain  degree  of  satisfaction,  in  that  it  is  elo- 
quent testimony  of  this  agreeable  fact,  that  the  oldest 
anarchists  are  losing  their  control  over  the  State.  They 
hold  their  sway  over  it  more  and  more  feebly,  and  even 
when  the  State  is  entirely  obedient  to  their  will,  it  is 
not  infrequently  because  they  have  temporarily  purchased 
that  power.  When  the  manufacturers,  the  trusts,  and  the 
beneficiaries  of  special  privilege  generally  are  forced  pe- 
riodically to  go  out  and  purchase  the  State  from  the 
Robin  Hoods  of  politics,  when  they  are  compelled  to 
finance  lavishly  every  political  campaign,  and  then  ab- 
jectly go  to  the  very  men  whom  their  money  has  put 
into  power  and  buy  them  again,  their  bleeding  misery 
becomes  an  object  of  pity. 

This  really  amounts  to  an  almost  absolute  transposition 
of  the  classes.  In  the  early  nineties  Engels  saw  the 
beginning  of  this  change,  and,  in  what  Sombart  rightly 
says  may  be  looked  upon  as  a  kind  of  "political  last  will 
and  testament"  to  the  movement,  Engels  writes:  "The 
time  for  small  minorities  to  place  themselves  at  the  head 
of  the  ignorant  masses  and  resort  to  force  in  order  to 
bring  about  revolutions  is  gone.  A  complete  change  in 
the  organization  of  society  can  be  brought  about  only  by 
the  conscious  cooperation  of  the  masses;  they  must  be 
alive  to  the  aim  in  view;  they  must  know  what  they 


348      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

want.  The  history  of  the  last  fifty  years  has  taught 
that.  But,  if  the  masses  are  to  understand  the  line  of 
action  that  is  necessary,  we  must  work  hard  and  con- 
tinuously to  bring  it  home  to  them.  That,  indeed,  is 
what  we  are  now  engaged  upon,  and  our  success  is 
driving  our  opponents  to  despair.  The  irony  of  destiny 
is  turning  everything  topsy-turvy.  We,  the  'revolution- 
aries,' are  profiting  more  by  lawful  than  by  unlawful  and 
revolutionary  means.  The  parties  of  order,  as  they  call 
themselves,  are  being  slowly  destroyed  by  their  own 
weapons.  Their  cry  is  that  of  Odilon  Barrot:  'Lawful 
means  are  killing  us.'  .  .  .  We,  on  the  contrary,  are 
thriving  on  them,  our  muscles  are  strong,  and  our  cheeks 
are  red,  and  we  look  as  though  we  intend  to  live  for- 
ever!" (8) 

And  if  lawful  means  are  killing  them,  so  are  science 
and  democracy.  We  no  longer  live  in  an  age  when  any 
suggestion  of  change  is  deemed  a  sacrilege.  The  period 
has  gone  by  when  political,  social,  and  industrial  institu- 
tions are  supposed  to  be  unalterable.  No  one  believes 
them  fashioned  by  Divinity,  and  there  is  nothing  so  sacred 
in  the  worldly  affairs  of  men  that  it  cannot  be  ques- 
tioned. There  is  no  law,  or  judicial  decision,  or  decree, 
or  form  of  property,  or  social  status  that  cannot  be  criti- 
cally examined;  and,  if  men  can  agree,  none  is  so  firmly 
established  that  it  cannot  be  changed.  It  is  agreed  that 
men  shall  be  allowed  to  speak,  write,  and  propagate  their 
views  on  all  questions,  whether  religious,  political,  or 
industrial.  In  theory,  at  least,  all  authority,  law,  admin- 
istrative institutions,  and  property  relations  are  decided 
ultimately  in  the  court  of  the  people.  Through  their 
press  these  things  may  be  discussed.  On  their  platform 
these  things  may  be  approved  or  denounced.  In  their 
assemblies  there  is   freedom   to   make  any   declaration 


VISIONS  OF  VICTORY  349 

for  or  against  things  as  they  are.  And  through  their 
votes  and  representatives  there  is  not  one  institution  that 
cannot  be  molded,  changed,  or  even  abolished.  Upon 
this  theory  modern  society  is  held  together.  It  is  a  belief 
so  firmly  rooted  in  the  popular  mind  that,  although  every- 
thing goes  against  the  people,  they  peacefully  submit. 
So  firmly  established,  indeed,  is  this  tradition  that  even 
the  most  irate  admit  that  where  wrong  exists  the  chief 
fault  lies  with  the  people  themselves. 

Whatever  may  be  said  concerning  its  limitations  and 
its  perversions,  this,  then,  is  an  age  of  democracy, 
founded  upon  a  widespread  faith  in  majority  rule. 
Whether  it  be  true  or  not,  the  conviction  is  almost  uni- 
versal that  the  majority  can,  through  its  political  power, 
accomplish  any  and  every  change,  no  matter  how  revo- 
lutionary. Our  whole  Western  civilization  has  had  bred 
into  it  the  belief  that  those  who  are  dissatisfied  with 
things  as  they  are  can  agitate  to  change  them,  are  even 
free  to  organize  for  the  purpose  of  changing  them,  and 
can,  in  fact,  change  them  whenever  the  majority  is  won 
over  to  stand  with  them.  This,  again,  is  the  theory,  al- 
though there  is  no  one  of  us,  of  course,  but  will  admit 
that  a  thousand  ways  are  found  to  defeat  the  will  of 
the  majority.  There  are  bribery,  fraudulent  elections,  and 
an  infinite  variety  of  corrupting  methods.  There  is  the 
control  of  parliaments,  of  courts,  and  of  political  parties 
by  special  privilege.  There  are  oppressive  and  unjust 
laws  obtained  through  trickery.  There  is  the  over- 
whelming power  exercised  by  the  wealthy  through  their 
control  of  the  press  and  of  nearly  all  means  of  enlight- 
enment. Through  their  power  and  the  means  they  have 
to  corrupt,  the  majority  is  indeed  so  constantly  deceived 
that,  when  one  dwells  only  on  this  side  of  our  political 
life,  it  is  easy  to  arrive  at  the  conviction  that  democracy 


350      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

is  a  myth  and  that,  in  fact,  the  end  may  never  come  of 
this  power  of  the  few  to  divert  and  pervert  the  institu- 
tions for  expressing  the  popular  will. 

But  there  is  no  way  of  achieving  democracy  in  any 
form  except  through  democracy,  and  we  have  found  that 
he  who  rejects  political  action  finds  himself  irresistibly 
drawn  into  the  use  of  means  that  are  both  indefensible 
and  abortive.  Curiously  enough,  in  this  use  of  methods, 
as  in  other  ways,  extremes  meet.  Both  the  despot  and 
the  terrorist  are  anti-democrats.  Neither  the  anarchist 
of  Bakounin's  type  nor  the  anarchist  of  the  Wall  Street 
type  trusts  the  people.  With  their  cliques  and  inner 
circles  plotting  their  conspiracies,  they  are  forced  to  travel 
the  same  subterranean  passages.  The  one  through  cor- 
ruption impresses  the  will  of  the  wealthy  and  powerful 
upon  the  community.  The  other  hopes  that  by  some  dash 
upon  authority  a  spirited,  daring,  and  reckless  minority 
can  overturn  existing  society  and  establish  a  new  social 
order.  The  method  of  the  political  boss,  the  aristocrat, 
the  self-seeker,  the  monopolist — even  in  the  use  of  thugs, 
private  armies,  spies,  and  provocateurs — differs  little 
from  the  methods  proposed  by  Bakounin  in  his  Alliance. 
And  it  is  not  in  the  least  strange  that  much  of  the  law- 
lessness and  violence  of  the  last  half-century  has  had  its 
origin  in  these  two  sources.  In  all  the  unutterably  des- 
picable work  of  detective  agencies  and  police  spies  that 
has  led  to  the  destruction  of  property,  to  riots  and  minor 
rebellions  that  have  cost  the  lives  of  many  thousands  in 
recent  decades,  we  find  the  sordid  materialism  of  special 
privilege  seeking  to  gain  its  secret  ends.  In  all  the  un- 
utterably tragic  work  of  the  terrorists  that  has  cost  so 
many  lives  we  find  the  rage  and  despair  of  self-styled 
revolutionists  seeking  to  gain  their  secret  ends.  After 
all,  it  matters  little  whether  the  aim  of  a  group  of  con- 


VISIONS  OF  VICTORY  351 

spirators  is  purely  selfish  or  wholly  altruistic.  It  matters 
little  whether  their  program  is  to  build  into  a  system 
private  monopoly  or  to  save  the  world  from  that  monop- 
oly. Their  methods  outrage  democracy,  even  when  they 
are  not  actually  criminal.  The  oldest  anarchist  believes 
that  the  people  must  be  deceived  into  a  worse  social 
order,  and  that  at  least  is  a  tribute  to  their  intelligence. 
On  the  other  hand,  the  Bakouninists,  old  and  new,  believe 
that  the  people  must  be  deceived  into  a  better  social 
order,  and  that  is  founded  upon  their  complete  distrust 
of  the  people. 

And,  rightly  enough,  the  attitude  of  the  masses  toward 
the  secret  and  conspiratory  methods  of  both  the^idealist 
anarchist  and  the  materialist  anarchist  is  the  same.     If 
the  latter  distrust  the  people,  the  people  no  less  distrust 
them.    If  the  masses  would  mob  the  terrorist  who  springs 
forth  to  commit  some  fearful  act,  the  purpose  of  which 
they    cannot    in   the    least   understand,   they    would,   if 
possible,  also  mob  the  individual  responsible  for  manipu- 
lation of  elections,  for  the  buying  of  legislatures,  and  for 
the  purchasing  of  court  decisions.    They  fear,  distrust, 
and  denounce  the  terrorist  who  goes  forth  to  commit  ar- 
son, pillage,  or  assassination  no  less  than  the  anarchist 
who  purchases  private  armies,  hires  thugs  to  beat  up 
unoffending  citizens,  and  uses  the  power  of  wealth  to 
undermine  the  Government.     In  one  sense,  the  acts  of 
the  materialist  anarchist  are  clearer  even  than  those  of 
the  other.     The  people  know  the  ends  sought  by  the 
powerful.     On  the  other  hand,  the  ends  sought  by  the 
terrorist  are  wholly  mysterious;  he  has  not  even  taken 
the  trouble  to  make  his  program  clear.     We  find,  then, 
that  the  anarchist  of  high  finance,  who  would  suppress 
democracy   in    the    interest   of    a    new    feudalism,    and 
the  anarchist  of  a  sect,  who  would  override  democracy 


352      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

in  the  hope  of  communism,  are  classed  together  in  the 
popular  mind.  The  man  who  in  this  day  deifies  the  in- 
dividual or  the  sect,  and  would  make  the  rights  of  the 
individual  or  the  sect  override  the  rights  of  the  many, 
is  battling  vainly  against  the  supreme  current  of  the 
age. 

Democracy  may  be  a  myth.  Yet  of  all  the  faiths  of 
our  time  none  is  more  firmly  grounded,  none  more 
warmly  cherished.  If  any  man  refuses  to  abide  by  the 
decisions  of  democracy  and  takes  his  case  out  of  that 
court,  he  ranges  against  himself  practically  the  entire 
populace.  On  the  other  hand,  the  man  who  takes  his 
case  to  that  court  is  often  forced  to  suffer  for  a  long 
time  humiliating  defeats.  If  the  case  be  a  new  one  but 
little  understood,  there  is  no  place  where  a  hearing  seems 
so  hard  to  win  as  in  exactly  that  court.  Universal  suf- 
frage, by  which  such  cases  are  decided,  appears  to  the 
man  with  a  new  idea  as  an  obstacle  almost  overwhelming. 
He  must  set  out  on  a  long  and  dreary  road  of  education 
and  of  organization ;  he  must  take  his  case  before  a 
jury  made  up  of  untold  millions;  he  must  wait  maybe 
for  centuries  to  obtain  a  majority.  To  go  into  this  great 
open  court  and  plead  an  entirely  new  cause  requires  a 
courage  that  is  sublime  and  convictions  that  have  the 
intensity  of  a  religion.  One  who  possesses  any  doubt 
cannot  begin  a  task  so  gigantic,  and  certainly  one  who, 
for  any  reason,  distrusts  the  people  cannot,  of  course,  put 
his  case  in  that  court.  It  was  with  full  realization  of 
the  difficulties,  of  the  certainty  of  repeated  defeats,  and 
of  the  overwhelming  power  against  them  that  the  social- 
ists entered  this  great  arena  to  fight  their  battle.  Univer- 
sal suffrage  is  a  merciless  thing.  How  often  has  it  served 
the  purpose  of  stripping  the  socialist  naked  and  exposing 
him  to  a  terrible  humiliation!    Again  and  again,  in  the 


VISIONS  OF  VICTORY  353 

history  of  the  last  fifty  years,  have  the  socialists,  after 
tremendous  agitation,  gigantic  mass  meetings,  and  wide- 
spread social  unrest,  marched  their  followers  to  the  polls 
with  results  positively  pitiful.  A  dozen  votes  out  of 
thousands  have  in  more  cases  than  one  marked  their 
relative  power.  There  is  no  other  example  in  the  world 
of  such  faith,  courage,  and  persistence  in  politics  as  that 
of  the  socialists,  who,  despite  defeat  after  defeat,  humilia- 
tion after  humiliation,  have  never  lost  hope,  but  on  every 
occasion,  in  every  part  of  the  modern  world,  have  gone 
up  again  and  again  to  be  knocked  down  by  that  jury. 
And  let  it  be  said  to  their  credit  that  never  once  any- 
where have  the  socialists  despaired  of  democracy.  "So- 
cialism and  democracy  .  .  .  belong  to  each  other, 
round  out  each  other,  and  can  never  stand  in  contradic- 
tion to  each  other.  Socialism  without  democracy  is 
pseudo-socialism,  just  as  democracy  without  socialism  is 
pseudo-democracy.  The  democratic  state  is  the  only  pos- 
sible form  of  a  socialized  society."  (9)  The  insepara- 
bleness  of  democracy  and  socialism  has  served  the  or- 
ganized movement  as  an  unerring  guide  at  every  moment 
of  its  struggle  for  existence  and  of  its  fight  against  the 
ruling  powers.  It  has  served  to  keep  its  soul  free  from 
that  cynical  distrust  of  the  people  which  is  evident  in 
the  writings  of  the  anarchists  and  of  the  syndicalists — in 
Bakounin,  Nechayeff,  Sorel,  Berth,  and  Pouget.  It  has 
also  served  to  keep  it  from  those  emotional  reactions 
which  have  led  nearly  every  great  leader  of  the  direct- 
actionists  in  the  last  century  to  become  in  the  end  an 
apostate.  Feargus  O'Connor,  Joseph  Rayner  Stephens, 
the  fierce  leaders  of  Chartism ;  Bakounin,  Blanc,  Richard, 
Jaclard,  Andrieux,  Bastelica,  the  flaming  revolutionists  of 
the  Alliance;  Briand,  Sorel,  Berth,  the  leading  propa- 
gandists and  philosophers  of  modern  syndicalism;  every 


354   •  VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

one  of  them  turned  in  despair  from  the  movement.  Cob- 
den,  Bonaparte,  Clemenceau,  the  Empire,  the  "new  mon- 
archy," or  a  comfortable  berth,  claimed  in  the  end  every 
one  of  these  impatient  middle-class  intellectuals,  who 
never  had  any  real  understanding  of  the  actual  labor 
movement.  And,  if  the  union  of  democracy  and  social- 
ism has  saved  the  movement  from  reactions  such  as 
these,  it  has  also  saved  it  from  the  desperation  that  gives 
birth  to  individual  methods,  such  as  the  Propaganda  of 
the  Deed  and  sabotage.  That  is  what  the  inseparableness 
of  democracy  and  socialism  has  done  for  the  movement 
in  the  past;  and  it  has  in  it  an  even  greater  service  yet 
to  perform.  It  has  the  power  of  salvation  for  society 
itself  in  the  not  remote  future,  when  it  will  be  face  to 
face,  throughout  the  world,  with  an  irresistible  current 
toward  State  socialism.  Industrial  democracy  and  politi- 
cal democracy  are  indissolubly  united ;  their  union  cannot 
be  sundered  except  at  the  cost  of  destruction  to  them 
both. 

In  adopting,  then,  the  methods  of  education,  of  organi- 
zation, and  of  political  action  the  socialists  rest  their  case 
upon  the  decision  of  democracy.  They  accept  the  weap- 
ons that  civilization  has  put  into  their  hands,  and  they 
are  testing  the  word  of  kings  and  of  parliaments  that 
democracy  can,  if  it  wishes,  alter  the  bases  of  society. 
And  in  no  small  measure  this  is  the  secret  of  their  im- 
mense strength  and  of  their  enormous  growth.  There 
is  nothing  strange  in  the  fact  that  the  socialists  stand 
almost  alone  to-day  faithful  to  democracy.  It  simply 
means  that  they  believe  in  it  even  for  themselves,  that 
is  to  say,  for  the  working  class.  They  believe  in  it  for 
industry  as  well  as  for  politics,  and,  if  they  are  at  war 
with  the  political  despot,  they  are  also  at  war  with  the 
industrial  despot.     Everyone  is  a  socialist  and  a  demo- 


VISIONS  OF  VICTORY  355 

crat  within  his  circle.  No  capitalist  objects  to  a  group 
of  capitalists  cooperatively  owning  a  great  railroad.  The 
fashionable  clubs  of  both  city  and  country  are  almost 
perfect  examples  of  group  socialism.  They  are  owned 
cooperatively  and  conducted  for  the  benefit  of  all  the 
members.  Even  some  reformers  are  socialists  in  this 
measure — that  they  believe  it  would  be  well  for  the  com- 
munity to  own  public  utilities,  provided  skilled,  trained, 
honorable  men,  like  themselves,  are  permitted  to  conduct 
them.  Indeed,  the  only  democracy  or  socialism  that  is 
seriously  combated  is  that  which  embraces  the  most 
numerous  and  most  useful  class  in  society,  "the  only  class 
that  is  not  a  class";  (10)  the  only  class  so  numerous 
that  it  "cannot  effect  its  emancipation  without  delivering 
all  society  from  its  division  into  classes."  (11) 

In  any  case,  here  it  is,  "the  self-conscious,  inde- 
pendent movement  of  the  immense  majority,  in  the  inter- 
est of  the  immense  majority,"  (12)  already  with  its  eleven 
million  voters  and  its  fifty  million  souls.  It  has  slowly, 
patiently,  painfully  toiled  up  to  a  height  where  it  is  be- 
ginning to  see  visions  of  victory.  It  has  faith  in  itself  and 
in  its  cause.  It  believes  it  has  the  power  of  deliverance 
for  all  society  and  for  all  humanity.  It  does  not  ex- 
pect the  powerful  to  have  faith  in  it ;  but,  as  Jesus  came 
out  of  despised  Nazareth,  so  the  new  world  is  coming 
out  of  the  multitude,  amid  the  toil  and  sweat  and  an- 
guish of  the  mills,  mines,  and  factories  of  the  world.  It 
has  endured  much ;  suffered  ages  long  of  slavery  and 
serfdom.  From  being  mere  animals  of  production,  the 
workers  have  become  the  "hands"  of  production ;  and 
they  are  now  reaching  out  to  become  the  masters  of 
production.  And,  while  in  other  periods  of  the  world 
their  intolerable  misery  led  them  again  and  again  to 
strike  out  in  a  kind  of  torrential  anarchy  that  pulled 


356      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

down  society  itself,  they  have  in  our  time,  for  the  first 
time  in  the  history  of  the  world,  patiently  and  persist- 
ently organized  themselves  into  a  world  power.    Where 
shall  we  find  in  all  history  another  instance  of  the  organi- 
zation in  less  than  half  a  century  of  eleven  million  people 
into  a  compact  force  for  the  avowed  purpose  of  peace- 
fully and  legally  taking  possession  of  the  world?    They 
have  refused  to  hurry.    They  have  declined  all  short  cuts. 
They  have  spurned  violence.    The  "bourgeois  democrats," 
the  terrorists,  and  the  syndicalists,  each  in  their  time,  have 
tried  to  point  out  a  shorter,  quicker  path.    The  workers 
have  refused  to  listen  to  them.     On  the   other  hand, 
they  have  declined  the  way  of  compromise,  of  fusions, 
and  of  alliances,  that  have  also  promised  a  quicker  and 
a  shorter  road  to  power.    With  the  most  maddening  pa- 
tience they  have  declined  to  take  any  other  path  than 
their  own — thus  infuriating  not  only  the  terrorists  in  their 
own  ranks  but  those  Greeks  from  the  other  side  who 
came  to  them  bearing  gifts.     Nothing  seems  to  disturb 
them  or  to  block  their  path.     They  are  offered  reforms 
and  concessions,  which  they  take  blandly,  but  without 
thanks.    They  simply  move  on  and  on,  with  the  terrible, 
incessant,    irresistible   power   of    some   eternal,    natural 
force.    They  have  been  fought ;  yet  they  have  never  lost 
a  single  great  battle.     They  have  been  flattered  and  ca- 
joled, without  ever  once  anywhere  being  appeased.    They 
have  been  provoked,  insulted,  imprisoned,  calumniated, 
and   repressed.     They  are  indifferent  to  it  all.     They 
simply  move  on  and  on — with  the  patience  and  the  meek- 
ness of  a  people  with  the  vision  that  they  are  soon  to 
inherit  the  earth. 


AUTHORITIES 


CHAPTER    I 

(i)  Macaulay,  Critical,  Historical,  and  Miscellaneous  Essays: 
The  Earl  of  Chatham,  p.  3. 

(2)  Bakounin,  (Euvres,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  21.     (P.  V.  Stock,  Paris, 

1912-1913.) 

(3)  Idem,  Vol.   II,  p.  xiv. 

(4)  Idem,  Vol.  II,  p.  xlvii. 

(5)  L' Alliance  de  la  Democratic  Socialiste  et  V Association  In- 

ternationale des  Travailleurs,  p.  121.  (Secret  Statutes 
of  the  Alliance.)  A.  Darson,  London,  and  Otto  Meissner, 
Hamburg,  1873. 

(6)  Idem,  p.  125.     (Secret  Statutes  of  the  Alliance.) 

(7)  Idem,  p.  128.     (Secret  Statutes  of  the  Alliance.) 

(8)  Idem,  p.  11.     (The  Secret  Alliance.) 

(9)  Idem,  p.  129.     (Secret  Statutes  of  the  Alliance.) 

(10)  Bakounin,  op.  cit.,  Vol.  II,  p.  viii. 

(11)  L' Alliance,  etc.,  p.  95. 

(12)  Bakounin,  op.  cit.,  Vol.  II,  p.  viii. 

(13)  Idem,  Vol.  II,  p.  xxiii. 

(14)  Quoted  in  L' Alliance,  etc.,  p.   112. 

(15)  Idem,  p.  117. 

(16)  L' Alliance,  etc.,  p.  129.     (Secret  Statutes  of  the  Alliance.) 

(17)  Idem,  pp.  128-129.     (Secret  Statutes  of  the  Alliance.) 

(18)  Idem,  p.  132.     (Secret  Statutes  of  the  Alliance.) 

(19)  Cf.    Guillaume,   L' Internationale ;    documents   ct   souvenirs 

(1864-1878).  Vol.  I,  p.  131.  (fidouard  Comely  et  Cie., 
Paris,  1905-1910.) 

(20)  Cf.  Idem,  Vol.  I,  pp.  132-133,  for  entire  program. 

(21)  Bakounin,  op.  cit.,  Vol.  V,  p.  53. 

(22)  U Alliance,  etc.,  pp.  64-65. 

(23)  Idem,  p.  65  (quotations  from  The  Principles  of  the  Revo- 

lution). 

357 


358      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

(24)  Idem,  p.  66  (The  Principles  of  the  Revolution). 

(25)  Idem,  p.  68   (The  Principles  of  the  Revolution). 

(26)  Idem,  pp.  90-92. 

(27)  Idem,  pp.  93-94- 

(28)  Idem,  pp.  94-95- 

(29)  Idem,  p.  95. 

(30)  Guillaume,  op.  cit.,  Vol.  II,  p.  60. 

(31)  Idem,  Vol.  II,  pp.  61-63. 

(32)  Idem,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  312. 


CHAPTER    II 

(1)  Guillaume,  op.  cit.,  Vol.  II,  p.  90. 

(2)  Lefrancais,  Memoir es  d'un  revolutionnaire,  p.  348  (Paris). 

(3)  Guillaume,  op.  cit.,  Vol.  II,  p.  92  (Oscar  Testut). 

(4)  Idem,  Vol.  II,  p.  92. 

(5)  Idem,  Vol.  II,  p.  93- 

(6)  Idem,  Vol.  II,  pp.  94-95- 

(7)  Idem,  Vol.  II,  p.  96. 

(8)  Idem.  Vol.  II,  p.  96. 

(9)  Idem,  Vol.  II,  p.  96. 

(10)  Idem,  Vol.  II,  p.  97. 

(11)  Idem,  Vol.  II,  p.  97. 

(12)  Idem,  Vol.  II,  p.  97. 

(13)  Idem,  Vol.  II,  pp.  98-99. 

(14)  Idem,  Vol.  II,  p.  98. 

(15)  Quoted  by  Idem,  Vol.  II,  p.   101.     Cf.  The  Social  Demo- 

crat, April   15,  1903. 

(16)  L' Alliance,  etc.,  p.   21. 

(17)  Marx,  The  Commune  of  Paris  (Bax's  translation),  p.  123. 

(Twentieth  Century  Press,  Ltd.,  London,  1895.) 

(18)  Guillaume,  op.  cit.,  Vol.  Ill,  p.   100. 

(19)  Idem,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  98. 

(20)  Bakunisten  an  der  Arbeit,  I,  by  Frederick  Engels,  printed 

in  Der   Volksstaat,  October  31,   1873,   No.   105. 

(21)  Quoted  by  Guillaume,  op.  cit.,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  154. 

(22)  Idem,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  100. 

(23)  Idem,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  204. 
(24}  Idem,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  207. 
(25)  Idem,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  208. 


AUTHORITIES  359 


(26)  Idem,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  186. 

(27)  Idem,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  186. 

(28)  Idem,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  146. 

(29)  Idem,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  237. 


CHAPTER  III 

(1)  Kropotkin,  Memoirs  of  a  Revolutionist,  p.  394.     (Hough- 

ton,  Mifflin  &  Co.,  Boston,   1899.) 

(2)  Idem,  p.  287. 

(3)  Guillaume,  op.  cit.,  Vol.  IV,  pp.  113-114- 

(4)  Idem,  Vol.  IV,  p.  225. 

(5)  Idem,  Vol.  IV,  p.  225. 

(6)  Idem,  Vol.  IV,  p.  226. 

(7)  Kropotkin,    Paroles    d'un    revolts,   pp.    285-288    (E.    Flam- 

marion,  Paris,  1885). 

(8)  L' Alliance,  etc.,  p.  65   (The  Principles  of  the  Revolution). 

(9)  Prolo,  Les  Anarchistes,  pp.  14-15   (Marcel  Riviere  et  Cie., 

Paris,  1912)  ;  or  Guillaume,  op.  cit.,  Vol.  IV,  pp.  160-168. 

(10)  Prolo,  op.   cit.,  pp.   15-17;  or  Guillaume,  op.   cit.,  Vol.  IV, 

pp.   184-188. 

(11)  Bebel,  My  Life,  p.  330   (Chicago  University  Press,  1912). 

(12)  Zenker,  Anarchism:   A  Criticism  and  History  of  the  An- 

archist   Theory,    p.    282    (G.    P.    Putnam's    Sons,    New- 
York,   1901). 

(13)  Idem,  pp.  294-295. 

(14)  Kropotkin,   op.    cit.,  pp.   448-449. 

(15)  Zenker,  op.   cit.,  p.  286. 


CHAPTER  IV 

(1)  Guillaume,  op.  cit..  Vol.  IV,  p.  209. 

(2)  Idem,  Vol.  IV,  p.  227. 

(3)  Quoted  by  Zenker,  op.  cit.,  pp.  235-236. 

(4)  Zenker,  op.  cit.,  pp.  2S2-283. 

(5)  Emma    Goldman,    Anarchism    and    Other    Essays,    p.    47 

(Mother  Earth  Publishing  Co.,  New  York,  1911). 

(6)  Quoted  in  History  of  Socialism  in  the  United  States,  p. 


360      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

219    (Funk  &   Wagnalls,   New  York,    1910),   by   Morris 
Hillquit,  who  gives  a  fuller  acount  of  this  period. 

(7)  Quoted  by  Ely,  The  Labor  Movement  in  America,  p.  262 

(Thomas  Y.  Crowell,  New  York,  3d  ed.,  1910). 

(8)  Idem,  p.  263. 

(9)  The  Chicago  Martyrs,  p.  30  (Free  Society  Publishing  Co., 

San  Francisco,   1899). 

(10)  Reprinted  in  Instead  of  a  Book,  by  Benjamin  R.  Tucker, 

pp.  429-432   (Benj.  R.   Tucker,  New  York,   1897). 

(11)  Idem,  p.  429. 

(12)  Bebel,  My  Life,  p.  237. 

(13)  Alexander    Berkman,    Prison    Memoirs    of    an    Anarchist, 

p.    7    (Mother   Earth    Publishing   Company,    New    York, 
1912). 


CHAPTER  V 

(1)  Quoted  by  Prolo,  Les  Anarchistes,  p.  44. 

(2)  Prolo,  op.   cit.,  p.  45. 

(3)  Quoted  from  L' Eclair  by  Prolo,  op.  cit.,  p.  46. 

(4)  Quoted  by  Prolo,  op.  cit.,  p.  47. 

(5)  Quoted  by  Idem,  p.  47. 

(6)  Quoted  by  Idem,  p.  47. 

(7)  Emma  Goldman,  Anarchism  and  Other  Essays,  p.  101. 

(8)  Idem,  pp.  99-100. 

(9)  Idem,  pp.  102-103. 

(10)  Prolo,  op.  cit.,  p.  52. 

(11)  Idem,  pp.  54-55. 

(12)  Pall  Mall  Gazette,  April  29,  1912. 


CHAPTER    VI 

(1)  Emma  Goldman,  op.  cit.,  p.  98. 

(2)  Idem,  p.  113. 

(3)  Idem,  pp.  113-114. 

(4)  Percy  Bysshe  Shelley,  Julian  and  Maddalo. 

(5)  Idem. 

(6)  Angiolillo,  quoted  by  Goldman,  op.  cit.,  pp.   104-105. 


AUTHORITIES  361 

(7)  Goldman,  op.  cit.,  p.  103. 

(8)  The  Chicago  Martyrs,  p.  30. 

(9)  Alfred  Tennyson,  The  Vision  of  Sin,  IV. 

(10)  Lombroso,   Les  Anarchistes,  pp.    184,   181-183,   196   (Flam- 

marion,   Paris,   1896). 

(11)  Idem,  pp.  205-207. 

(12)  Quoted  by  Lombroso,  op.   cit.,  p.  207. 

(13)  Zenker,  op.  cit.,  pp.  306-307. 

(14)  Bebel,  Attentate  und  Sozialdemokratie,  p.  6,  a  speech  de- 

livered at  Berlin,  November  2,   1898   (Vorw'drts,  Berlin, 

1905). 

(15)  The   Chicago   Martyrs,  p.    130. 

(16)  Idem,  p.  16. 

(17)  Idem,  p.  62. 

(18)  Max  Stirner,  The  Ego  and  His  Own,  p.  477   (A.  C.   Fi- 

field,  London,  1912). 

(19)  Idem,  p.  425. 

(20)  Idem,  p.  394. 

(21)  Lombroso,  op.  cit.,  pp.  52-54. 

(22)  Marx  and  Engels,  The  Communist  Manifesto,  p.  29  (C.  H. 

Kerr  &  Co.,  Chicago,  1906). 

(23)  Reprinted  in  Guesde's  Quatre  cms  de  lutte  des  classes,  pp. 

88-91    (G.  Jacques  et  Cie.,  Paris,  1901). 

(24)  Idem,  p.  92. 

(25)  Bebel,  Attentate  und  S  ozialdcmokratie ,  pp.  12-14. 

(26)  Idem,  p.  1. 

(27)  Goldman,  Anarchism  and  Other  Essays,  pp.  92-93. 

(28)  Idem,  pp.  85-86. 

(29)  This  is  a  translation  of  an  editorial  that  has  appeared  in 

various  foreign  newspapers  and  also,  it  is  said,  in  the 
Illinois  Staats-Zeitung  ;  Cf.  De  Leon,  Socialism  versus 
Anarchism,  p.  61  (New  York  Labor  News  Company, 
New  York). 


CHAPTER  VII 

(1)  U Alliance  de  la  Democratic  Socialiste,  etc.,  p.  48. 

(2)  George    Brandes,    Main    Currents    in    Nineteenth    Century 

Literature,    Vol.    VI     (The    Macmillan    Company,    New 
York,    1906). 


362       VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

(3)  Engels  in  the  introduction  to  Revelations  sur  le  Proces  des 
Communistes,  published  together  with,  and  under  the 
title  of,  Marx's  L'Alletnagne  en  1848,  p.  268  (Schleicher 
Freres,  Paris,   1901). 

Idem,  p.  268. 

Idem,  pp.  268-269.     My   italics. 

Idem,  pp.  269-270. 

Communist  Manifesto,  p.   12. 

Idem,  p.  44. 

Idem,  p.  15. 

Idem,  p.  25. 

Idem,  p.  25. 

Idem,  p.  26. 

Idem,  p.  30. 

Idem,  p.  44. 

Idem,  pp.  42,  46. 

Engels,  op.  cit.,  p.  287. 

Idem,  p.  287. 

Quoted  by  Engels  in  op.  cit.,  p.  297. 

Albion  W.  Small,  Socialism  in  the  Light  of  Social  Science, 
reprinted  from  the  American  Journal  of  Sociology,  Vol. 
XVII,  No.  6  (May,  1912),  p.  810. 

Communist  Manifesto,  pp.  12,  13. 

Albion  W.  Small,  article  cited,  p.  812. 

Idem,  p.  812. 

Address  and  Provisional  Rules  of  the  International  Work- 
ing Men's  Association  (London,  1864),  p.  12. 

Letter  of  Marx's  of  October  9,  1866,  published  in  the  Nene 
Zeit,  April   12,   1902. 

Address  and  Provisional  Rules  of  the  International  Work- 
ing Men's  Association   (London,  1864),  p.  9. 

Idem,  p.  9. 

Idem,  p.  10. 

Idem,  p.  11. 

Engels,  op.  cit.,  p.  287. 

Marx,  L'Allcmagne  en  J848,  p.  188. 

Letter  of  October  9.  1866,  published  in  the  Neue  Zeit,  April 
12,  1902. 
(323   Quoted    by   Jaeckh.    The    International,   p.    32    (Twentieth 
Century  Press,  Ltd.,   London). 


AUTHORITIES  363 

(33)  Nicolay  and  Hay,  Complete  Works  of  Abraham  Lincoln. 

Vol.  X,  p.  53   (Francis  D.  Tandy  Co.,  New  York).     My 
italics. 

(34)  Jaures,  Studies  in  Socialism,  p.  133  (G.  P.  Putnam's  Sons, 

New  York,   1906,  translated  by  Mildred  Minturn). 


CHAPTER  VIII 

(1)  Bakounin,  CEuvres,  Vol.  II,  p.  viii. 

(2)  Idem,  Vol.  II,  pp.  xi-xii. 

(3)  L'Allemagne  en  1848,  p.  279. 

(4)  Liebknecht,   Karl   Marx :   Biographical   Memoirs,  pp.  62-63 

(C.  H.  Kerr,  Chicago,  1904). 

(5)  Bakounin,  op.  cit.,  Vol.  II,  p.  xvii. 

(6)  Cf.    Marx,    Revolution    and    Counter-Revolution,    p.    126 

(Scribner's,  New  York,  1896). 

(7)  Bakounin,  op.  cit.,  Vol.  II,  p.  xx. 

(8)  Idem,  Vol.  IV,  p.  383. 

(9)  Guillaume,  op.   cit.,  Vol.  I,  p.   103. 

(10)  Idem,  Vol.  I,  p.  103. 

(11)  Compte-Rendu   of    the   Fourth    International    Congress  of 

the    International    Working    Men's    Association,    Basel, 
1869,  pp.  6-7  (Bruxelles,  1869). 

(12)  Idem,  p.  7. 

(13)  Guillaume,  op.  cit.,  Vol.  I,  p.  202. 

(14)  I  am  following  here  the  English  version,  published  by  the 

General  Council,  pp.  26-27. 

(15)  Compte-Rendu   of   the   Fourth   International    Congress   of 

the  International  Working  Men's  Association,  pp.  85-86. 

(16)  Idem,  p.  89. 

(17)  Idem,  pp.  I44-T45- 

(18)  Guillaume,  op.  cit.,  Vol.  I,  p.  204. 

(19)  Quoted  by  Bakounin,  op.  cit.,  Vol.  V,  p.  223. 

(20)  Bakounin,  op.  cit.,  Vol.  V,  p.  232. 

(21)  Idem,  Vol.  V,  p.  233. 

(22)  Idem,  Vol.  V,  pp.  234-235. 

(23)  Idem,  Vol.  I,  pp.  xxxii-xxxiii. 

(24)  Idem,  Vol.  IV,  p.  62. 

(25)  Communist  Manifesto,  p.  44. 


364      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

(26)  Engels,  Socialism,  Utopian  and  Scientific,  pp.  69-70  (Scrib- 

ner's,   New  York,   1892). 

(27)  Idem,  pp.  71-72.    Italics  mine. 

(28)  Idem,  p.  86. 

(29)  Idem,  pp.  86-87. 

(30)  Idem,  pp.  76-77- 

(31)  Compte-Rcndu   of    the   Fourth    International    Congress   of 

the  International  Working  Men's  Association,  p.   86. 

(32)  Bakounin,  op.   cit.,  Vol.  IV,  pp.  31-32. 

(33)  Idem,  Vol.  IV,  p.  32. 

(34)  Idem,  Vol.  IV,  p.  32. 

(35)  Idem,  Vol.  IV,  p.  37. 

(36)  Idem,  Vol.  IV,  p.  39. 

(37)  Idem,  Vol.  IV,  p.  40. 

(38)  Idem,  Vol.  IV,  p.  59. 

(39)  Idem,  Vol.  IV,  pp.  191-192. 

(40)  Idem,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  31. 

(41)  Idem,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  40. 

(42)  Idem,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  72. 

(43)  Idem,  Vol.  IV,  p.  415. 

(44)  Idem,  Vol.  VI,  p.  38. 

(45)  Idem,  Vol.  VI,  pp.  38-39. 

(46)  Idem,  Vol.  IV,  pp.  438-439. 

(47)  Idem,  Vol.  VI,  p.  75. 

(48)  Engels,  Landmarks  of   Scientific  Socialism,  p.   190   (Kerr, 

Chicago,   1907). 

(49)  Idem,  p.  186. 

(50)  Idem,  pp.  184-185. 

(51)  Idem,  p.  190.     My  italics. 

(52)  Resolutions   of    the    Conference   of    Delegates   of   the   In- 

ternational Working  Men's  Association,  Assembled  at 
London  from  the  17th  to  the  23d  of  September,  1871, 
TSTo.  IX  (London,  1871). 


CHAPTER    IX 

(1)  L' Alliance  de  la  Democratic  Socialiste,  etc.,  p.  12. 

(2)  Bakounin,  GLuvres,  Vol.  IV,  p.  342. 

(3)  Cf.  Compte-Rendu  Ofhciel  of  the  Geneva  Congress,   1873, 
p.  51    (Locle,   1873). 


AUTHORITIES  365 

(4)  Idem,  pp.  55-56. 

(5)  Idem,  p.  86. 

(6)  Idem,  p.  87. 

(7)  Idem,  p.  85. 

(8)  Idem,  p.  35- 

(9)  Guillaume,  op.  cit.,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  118. 

(10)  Plechanoff,  Anarchism  and  Socialism,  p.  84   (The  Twen- 

tieth Century  Press,  Ltd.,  London,  1906;  trans,  by  Elea- 
nor Marx  Aveling). 

(11)  Guillaume,  op.  cit..  Vol.  IV,  pp.  114-115. 

(12)  Idem,  Vol.  IV,  p.  115. 

(13)  Idem,  Vol.  IV,  pp.  223-224. 

(14)  Dawson,  German  Socialism  and  Ferdinand  Lassalle,  p.  169, 

(Scribner's  Sons,  New  York,  1899). 

(15)  Ferdinand  Lassalle,  Reden  und  Schriften,  Vol.  II,  pp.  543" 
544    {Vorwarts,  Berlin,   1893). 

(16)  Idem,  Vol.  II,  p.  383- 

(17)  Idem,  Vol.  II,  p.  22. 

(18)  Idem,  Vol.  II,  p.  104. 

(19)  Quoted  by  Dawson,  op.  cit.,  p.  187. 

(20)  Idem,  p.  168;   Cf.   also,   Bernstein,   Ferdinand  Lassalle   as 

a   Social   Reformer,   pp.    167-170    (Scribner's   Sons,   New 
York,    1893). 

(21)  Quoted  by  Dawson,   op.  cit.,  p.   168. 

(22)  Quoted  by   Milhaud,  La  Democratic  socialiste  allemande, 
p.  32   (Felix  Alcan,  Paris,  1903)- 

(23)  Idem,  pp.  32-33- 

(24)  Idem,  p.  41. 

(25)  Idem,  p.  42. 

(26)  These   sections   are   reduced   from   Dawson's   summary  in 

op.  cit.,  pp.  255-257. 

(27)  Quoted  in  Dawson,  op.  cit.,  p.  260. 

(28)  Bebel,  Attentate  und  Sozialdcmokratie,  p.  2. 

(29)  Protokoll  of  the  Congress  of  the  German  Social-Democ- 

racy, Wyden,  1880,  p.  38  (Zurich,  1880). 

(30)  Idem,  p.  42. 

(31)  Idem,  p.  43. 

(32)  Quoted  by  Dawson,  op.  cit.,  p.  265. 

(33)  Speech  in  the  Reichstag,  March  21,  1884;  quoted  by  Daw- 

son, op.  cit.,  pp.  268-269. 


3(36      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

(34)  Speech  in  the  Reichstag,  April  2,  1886;  quoted  by  Daw- 
son, op.  cit.,  p.  271. 

do)  Protokoll  of  the  Proceedings  of  Party  Conferences  of  the 
German  Social-Democracy,  Erfurt.  1891,  p.  206  (Berlin, 
1891). 


(1 
(2 

(3 
(4 

(5 
(6 

(7 
(8 


(9 

(10 

(11 

(12 
(13 
(14 

(15 

(16 

(17 

(18 
(19 


CHAPTER   X 

Quoted  by  Prolo,  Les  Anarchistes,  p.  66. 
International    Socialist   Workers   and   Trade   Union   Con- 
gress, London,  1896,  p.  31. 
Idem,  p.  50. 
De  Seilhac,  Les  Congres  Ouvriers  en  France,  p.  331   (Ar- 

mand  Colin  et  Cie.,  Paris,  1899). 
Idem,  pp.  331-332. 
Compte-Rendu  du  Congres  National  Corporatif,  Montpe- 

lier,   1902. 
L' Alliance  de  la  Democratic  Socialiste,  etc.,  pp.  48-49. 
Sombart,  Socialism  and  the  Socialist  Movement,  pp.  08-99 

(E.  P.  Dutton  &  Co.,  New  York,  1909;  trans,  from  6th 

German  edition). 
Louis    Levine,   The    Labor    Movement   in   France,   p.    147 

(Columbia  University,  New  York,   1912). 
Arthur   D.    Lewis,    Syndicalism   and    the    General    Strike, 

p.  70  (T.  Fisher  Unwin,  London,  1912). 
Berth,  Les  Nouveaux  aspects  du  Socialisme,  p.  36  (Marcel 

Riviere  et  Cie.,  Paris,  1908). 
Robert  Browning,  Cleon. 
Sombart,  op.  cit.,  p.  no. 

Compte-Rendu  of  the  Seventh  International  Socialist  Con- 
gress, Stuttgart,  1907,  p.  202. 
Cf.    Compte-Rendu   of    the    Sixth    International    Socialist 

Congress,  Amsterdam,  1904,  p.  53. 
Levine,  op.  cit.,  p.  195. 
Compte-Rendu  du  Congres  National  Corporatif,  Toulouse, 

19 10,  p.  226. 
fitienne    Buisson,    La    Greve    Generate,    p.    59    (Librairie 

George  Bellais,  Paris,  1905). 
Labriola,  Karl  Marx,  pp.  255-259  (Marcel  Riviere  et  Cie., 

Paris.  1910). 


AUTHORITIES  367 

))   Plechanoff,  Anarchism  and  Socialism,  p.  63. 

;)  Kampffmeyer,  Gianges  in  the  Theory  and  Tactics  of  the 
German  Social  Democracy,  pp.  87-88  (C.  H.  Kerr,  Chi- 
cago, 1908). 

i)   Quoted  in  Kampffmeyer,  op.  cit.,  p.  88. 

()  Idem,  p.  89. 

[)   Quoted  in  Jaures,  Studies  in  Socialism,  pp.  75-76. 

;)  Kautsky,  Das  Erfurter  Programm.  pp.  117-119  (8th  Edi- 
tion, Stuttgart,  1007)  ;  Cf.  also  The  Socialist  Republic, 
by  Kautsky,  pp.  10-11. 

))  Communist  Manifesto,  p.   15. 

r)  Engels,  Socialism,  Utopian  and  Scientific,  p.  76. 

I)  Cf.  Menger,  The  Right  to  the  Whole  Produce  of  Labor, 
p.   117    (Macmillan  &  Co.,  London,   1899). 

))  Webb,  The  History  of  Trade  Unionism,  p.  145. 

))  Idem,  p.  146. 

.)  Quoted  by  Sombart,  op.  cit..  p.   118. 

0  Sombart,  op.  cit.,  p.  118. 

|)  Idem,  p.  118. 

(.)   Marx,  Revolution  and  Counter-Revolution,  pp.  109-110. 

;)  Compte-Rcndu  of  the  Fourth  International  Congress  of  the 
International  Working  Men's  Association,  p.  88. 

>)   Quoted  by  Plechanoff,  op.  cit.,  p.  90. 

')  £mile  Pouget,  Lc  Syndicat,  p.  13  (fimile  Pouget,  Paris, 
2d   Edition). 

5)  Sorel,  Illusions  du  pr ogres,  p.  10  (Marcel  Riviere  et  Cie., 
Paris,   191 1 ). 

))  Compte-Rendu  of  the  Fifth  National  Congress  of  the 
French  Socialist  Party,  1908,  p.  352. 

))  XI e.  Congrcs  National  Corporatif,  Paris,  1900,  p.  198; 
quoted  by  Levine,  op.  cit.,  p.  97. 

:)  La  Confederation  General e  du  Travail;   II  La  Tactique. 

>)  Idem. 

()  Cf.  Proudhon,  La  Revolution  socialc  et  le  coup  d'Btat. 
(Ernest  Flammarion,  Paris)  ;  Goldman,  Minorities  versus 
Majorities,  in  Anarchism  and  Other  Essays;  and  Kro- 
potkin,  Les  Minorites  Revolutionnaires,  in  Paroles  d'un 
rcvoltc. 
(44)  Webb,  The  History  of  Trade  Unionism,  pp.   147-148. 


368      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

(45)  Comptc-Rendu    of    the    Third    National    Congress    of    the 

French  Socialist  Party,  1906,  pp.  189-192. 

(46)  Idem,  p.  186. 

(47)  Jaures,  Studies  in  Socialism,  pp.   127-128. 

(48)  Idem,  pp.  124-125. 

(49)  Idem,  pp.  128-129. 

(50)  Compte-Rendu  of  the  Fourth  International  Congress  of  the 

International    Working    Men's    Association,    Basel,    1869, 
p.  6. 

(51)  Kropotkin,   The  Great  French   Revolution,  p.  423    (G.    P. 

Putnam's  Sons,  New  York,  1909). 

(52)  Proudhon,  Idee  Generate  de  la  Revolution  au  XlXe.  Sie- 

cle,  p.  304  (Gamier  Freres,  Paris,  1851). 

(53)  Idem,  p.  197. 

CHAPTER  XI 

(1)  Proudhon,  Idee  Generate  de  la  Revolution,  p.  149. 

(2)  Roger  A.  Pryor,  quoted  in  the  report  of  the  Investigation 

of  the  Employment  of  Pinkerton  Detectives :  House  Spe- 
cial Committee  Report,  1892,  p.  225. 

(3)  Investigation  of  the  Employment  of  Pinkerton  Detectives: 

Senate  Special  Committee  Report,  1892,  p.  247. 

(4)  Thomas    Beet,    Methods    of    American    Private    Detective 

Agencies,  Appleton's  Magazine,  October,   1906. 

(5)  Idem. 

(6)  Idem. 

(7)  Idem. 

(8)  Nczv  York  Sun,  May  8,   191 1. 

(9)  New  York  Call,  September  14,  1910. 

(10)  Investigation  of  the  Employment  of  Pinkerton  Detectives: 

House  Special  Committee  Report,  1892,  p.  226. 

(11)  See  his  testimony,  pp.  92-94  of  the  Senate   Report. 

(12)  Report    of    the    Industrial    Commission,    1901,    Vol.    VIII, 

pp.  257-258,  261   (Chicago  Labor  Disputes). 

(13)  American   Federationist,   November,   191 1,   Vol.   XVIII,  p. 

889. 

(14)  Limiting    Federal    Injunction:     Hearings    before    a    Sub- 

committee  of   the    Committee    on    the   Judiciary,   United 
States  Senate,  Jan.  6,  1913,  Part  I,  p.  19. 


AUTHORITIES  369 

Idem,  p.  20. 

Applet  on' s  Magazine,  October,  1906. 

Hillquit,  History  of  Socialism  in  the  United  States,  pp. 
280-281. 

Investigation  of  the  Employment  of  Pinkerton  Detectives, 
Senate   Special   Committee  Report,   1892,  p.  xiii. 

Idem,  p.  ii. 

Idem,  p.  xii. 

Idem,  p.  xv. 

Investigation  of  the  Employment  of  Pinkerton  Detectives: 
House  Special  Committee  Report,  1892,  p.  224. 

Idem,  p.  225. 

Report  on  the  Chicago  Strike  of  June-July,  1894,  by  the 
United  States  Strike  Commission,  p.  xxxviii. 

Idem,  p.  xliv. 

Idem,  p.  356. 

Idem,  p.  370. 

Idem,  p.  397- 

Idem,  pp.  366-367. 

Idem,  p.  371. 

Idem,  p.  368. 

Idem,  pp.  368-369. 

Idem,  p.  372  (from  the  testimony  of  Harold  I.  Cleve- 
land). 

Idem,  p.  360. 

Debs,  The  Federal  Government  and  the  Chicago  Strike, 
p.  24  (Standard  Publishing  Co.,  Terre  Haute,  Ind.,  1904). 

Idem,  p.  24. 

Emma  F.  Langdon,  The  Cripple  Creek  Strike,  p.  153  (The 
Great  Western   Publishing  Co.,   Denver,  1905). 

Report  of  the  Commissioner  of  Labor,  1905,  on  Labor  Dis- 
turbances in  Colorado,  p.  186. 

Idem,  p.  206. 

Idem,  p.  304. 

Cf.  Clarence  S.  Darrow,  Speech  in  the  Haywood  Case,  p. 
56    (Wayland's   Monthly,   Girard,   Kan.,   October,    1907)- 

Report  of  the  Commissioner  of  Labor,  1905,  on  Labor 
Disturbances  in  Colorado,  p.  192. 

C.  Dobrogeaunu-Gherea,  Socialism  vs.  Anarchism,  New 
York  Call,  February  5,  191 1. 


370      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

(44)  Kropotkin,  The  Terror  in  Russia,  p.  57  (Methuen  &  Co., 

London,  1909). 

(45)  Bamford,   Passages  in  the  Life  of   a  Radical,  Vol.  II,  p. 

14   (T.  Fisher  Unwin,  London,  1893). 

(46)  In   Bamford's   "Passages    in  the   Life   of   a   Radical"    (T. 

Fisher  Unwin,  London,  1893,  we  find  that  spies  and 
provocateurs  were  sent  into  the  labor  movement  as 
early  as  1815.  In  Holyoake's  "Sixty  Years  of  an  Agita- 
tor's Life"  (Unwin,  1900),  in  Howell's  "Labor  Legisla- 
tion, Labor  Movements,  Labor  Leaders"  (Unwin,  1902), 
and  in  Webb's  "History  of  Trade  Unionism"  (Long- 
mans, Green  &  Co.,  London,  1902),  the  work  of  several 
noted  police  agents  is  spoken  of.  In  Gammage's  "His- 
tory of  the  Chartist  Movement"  (Truslove  &  Hanson, 
London,  1894)  and  in  Davidson's  "Annals  of  Toil"  (F. 
R.  Henderson,  London,  n.d.)  we  are  told  of  one  police 
agent  who  gave  balls  and  ammunition  to  the  men  and 
endeavored  to  persuade  them  to  commit  murder. 

Marx,  in  "Revolution  and  Counter-Revolution"  (Scrib- 
ner's  Sons,  1896),  and  Engels,  in  Revelations  sur  le 
Proccs  des  Communist  es  (Schleicher  Freres,  Paris, 
1901),  tell  of  the  work  of  the  German  police  agents  in 
connection  with  the  Communist  League;  while  Bebel, 
in  "My  Life"  (Chicago  University  Press,  1912),  and  in 
Attentate  und  Sozialdemokratie  (Vorwarts,  Berlin, 
I905),  tells  of  the  infamous  work  of  provocateurs  sent 
among  the  socialists  at  the  time  of  Bismarck's  repres- 
sion. Kropotkin,  in  "The  Memoirs  of  a  Revolutionist" 
(Houghton,  Mifflin  &  Co.,  Boston,  1899),  and  in  "The 
Terror  in  Russia"  (Methuen  &  Co.,  London,  1909),  de- 
votes many  pages  to  the  crimes  committed  by  the  secret 
police  of  Russia,  not  only  in  that  country  but  else- 
where. Mazzini,  Marx,  Bakounin,  and  nearly  all  prom- 
inent anarchists,  socialists,  and  republicans  of  the  middle 
of  the  last  century,  were  surrounded  by  spies,  who  made 
every  effort  to  induce  them  to  enter  into  plots. 

In  the  "Investigation  of  the  Employment  of  Pinkerton 
Detectives :  House  and  Senate  Special  Committee  Re- 
ports, 1892";  in  the  "Report  on  Chicago  Strike  of  June- 
July,  1894;  U.  S.  Strike  Commission,  1895";  in  the  "Re- 


AUTHORITIES  371 

port  of  the  Commissioner  of  Labor  on  Labor  Disturb- 
ances in  Colorado,  1905";  in  the  "Report  of  the  Indus- 
trial Commission,  1901,  Vol.  VIII",  there  is  a  great  mass 
of  evidence  on  the  work  of  detectives,  both  in  committing 
violence  themselves  and  in  seeking  to  provoke  others  to 
violence. 

In  "Conditions  in  the  Paint  Creek  District  of  West 
Virginia:  Hearings  before  a  subcommittee  of  the  Com- 
mittee on  Education  and  Labor,  U.  S.  Senate,  1913";  >" 
"Hearings  before  the  Committee  on  Rules,  House  of 
Representatives,  on  Conditions  in  the  Westmoreland  Coal 
Fields" ;  in  the  "Report  on  the  Strike  at  Bethlehem,  Sen- 
ate Document  No.  521";  in  "Peonage  in  Western  Penn- 
sylvania :  Hearings  before  the  Committee  on  Labor, 
House  of  Representatives,  191 1,"  considerable  evidence 
is  given  of  the  thuggery  and  murder  committed  by  de- 
tectives, guards,  and  state  constabularies.  Some  of  this 
evidence  reveals  conditions  that  could  hardly  be  equaled 
in  Russia. 

"History  of  the  Conspiracy  to  Defeat  Striking  Mold- 
ers"  (Internatl.  Molders'  Union  of  N.  America)  ;  "Limit- 
ing Federal  Injunction:  Hearings  before  the  Subcommit- 
tee of  the  Committee  on  the  Judiciary,  U.  S.  Senate, 
1912,  Part  V";  the  report  of  the  same  hearings  for 
January,  1913,  Part  I ;  "United  States  Steel  Corporation : 
Hearings  before  Committee  on  Investigation,  House  of 
Representatives,  Feb.  12,  1912" ;  the  "Report  on  Strike 
of  Textile  Workers  in  Lawrence,  Mass. :  Commissioner 
of  Labor,  1912" ;  and  "Strike  at  Lawrence,  Mass. : 
Hearings  before  the  Committee  on  Rules,  House  of 
Representatives,  March  2-7,  1912,"  also  contain  a  mass 
of  evidence  concerning  the  crimes  of  detectives  and  the 
terrorist  tactics  used  by  those  employed  to  break  strikes. 

Alexander  Irvine's  "Revolution  in  Los  Angeles"  (Los 
Angeles,  1911)  ;  F.  E.  Wolfe's  "Capitalism's  Conspiracy 
in  California"  (The  White  Press,  Los  Angeles,  1911)  ; 
Debs's  "The  Federal  Government  and  the  Giicago  Strike" 
(Standard  Publishing  Co.,  Terre  Haute,  Ind.,  1904)  ; 
Ben  Lindsey's  "The  Rule  of  Plutocracy  in  Colorado"; 
the  "Reply  of  the  Western  Federation  of  Miners  to  the 


372      VIOLENCE  AND  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT 

'Red  Book'  of  the  Mine  Operators" ;  "Anarchy  in  Colo- 
rado: Who  Is  to  Blame?"  (The  Bartholomew  Publishing 
Co.,  Denver,  Colo.,  1905)  ;  the  American  Federationist, 
April,  1912;  the  American  Federationist,  November, 
191 1 ;  Job  Harriman's  "Class  War  in  Idaho"  (Volks- 
Zeitung  Library,  New  York,  1900)  ;  Emma  F.  Langdon's 
"The  Cripple  Creek  Strike"  (The  Great  Western  Pub- 
lishing Co.,  Denver,  1905)  ;  C.  H.  Salmons'  "The  Bur- 
lington Strike"  (Bunnell  &  Ward,  Aurora,  111.,  1889); 
and  Morris  Friedman's  "The  Pinkerton  Labor  Spy"  (Wil- 
shire  Book  Co.,  New  York,  1907),  contain  the  statements 
chiefly  of  labor  leaders  and  socialists  upon  the  violence 
suffered  by  the  unions  as  a  result  of  the  work  of  the 
courts,  of  the  police,  of  the  militia,  and  of  detectives. 
"The  Pinkerton  Labor  Spy"  gives  what  purports  to  be 
the  inside  story  of  the  Pinkerton  Agency  and  the  de- 
tails of  its  methods  in  dealing  with  strikes.  Clarence  S. 
Darrow's  "Speech  in  the  Haywood  Case"  (Wayland's 
Monthly,  Girard,  Kan.,  Oct.,  1907)  is  the  plea  made  be- 
fore the  jury  in  Idaho  that  freed  Haywood.  Only  the 
oratorical  part  of  it  was  printed  in  the  daily  press,  while 
the  crushing  evidence  Darrow  presents  against  the  de- 
tective agencies  and  their  infamous  work  was  ignored. 

Capt.  Michael  J.  Schaack's  "Anarchy  and  Anarchists" 
(F.  J.  Schulte  &  Co.,  Chicago,  1899)  ;  and  Pinkerton's 
"The  Molly  Maguires  and  Detectives"  (G.  W.  Dilling- 
ham Co.,  New  York,  1898)  are  the  naive  stories  of  those 
who  have  performed  notable  roles  in  labor  troubles. 
They  read  like  "wild-west"  stories  written  by  overgrown 
boys,  and  the  manner  in  which  these  great  detectives 
frankly  confess  that  they  or  their  agents  were  at  the 
bottom  of  the  plots  which  they  describe  is  quite  in- 
credible. 

"The  Chicago  Martyrs :  The  Famous  Speeches  of  the 
Eight  Anarchists  in  Judge  Gary's  Court  and  Altgeld's 
Reasons  for  Pardoning  Fielden,  Neebe  and  Schwab'' 
(Free  Society,  San  Franscisco,  1899),  contains  the  mem- 
orable message  of  Governor  Altgeld  when  pardoning  the 
anarchists.  In  his  opinion  they  were  in  no  small  measure 
the  dupes  of  police  spies  and  the  victims  of  judicial  in- 


AUTHORITIES  373 

justice.  I  have  dealt  at  length  with  Thomas  Beet's  ar- 
ticle on  "Methods  of  American  Private  Detectives"  in 
Appleton's  Magazine  for  October,  1906,  but  it  will  repay 
a  full  reading.  "Coeur  dAlene  Mining  Troubles :  The 
Crime  of  the  Century"  (Senate  Document)  and  "State- 
ment and  Evidence  in  Support  of  Charges  Against  the 
U.  S.  Steel  Corporation  by  the  American  Federation  of 
Labor"  are  perhaps  worth  mentioning. 

I  have  not  attempted  to  give  an  exhaustive  list  of  ref- 
erences, but  only  to  call  attention  to  a  few  books  and 
pamphlets  which  have  found  their  way  into  my  library. 

(47)  Quoted  by  August  Bebel  in  Attentate  und  Sozialdemokra- 

tie,  p.  12. 

(48)  Limiting  Federal  Injunctions:  Hearings  before  a  Subcom- 

mittee of  the  Committee  on  the  Judiciary,  United  States 
Senate,  1913,  Part  I,  p.  8. 


CHAPTER  XII 

(1)  Sombart,  Socialism  and  the  Socialist  Movement,  p.  176. 

(2)  Liebknecht,   Karl   Marx:   Biographical  Memoirs,  p.  46. 

(3)  Idem,  p.  85. 

(4)  L 'Alliance  de  la  Democratic  Socialiste,  etc.,  p.  132  (Secret 

Statutes  of  the  Alliance). 

(5)  Communist  Manifesto,  p.  37- 

(6)  Idem,  p.  32. 

(7)  Idem,  p.  38. 

(8)  Engels'  introduction  to  Struggle  of  the  Social  Classes  in 

France;  quoted  by  Sombart,  op.  cit.,  pp.  68-69. 

(9)  Liebknecht,  No  Compromise,  No  Political  Trading,  p.  28; 

my  italics. 

(10)  Frederic  Harrison,  quoted  in  Davidson's  Annals  of  Toil, 

p.  273  (F.  R.  Henderson,  London,  n.d.). 

(11)  Engels  in  L'Allemagne  en  1848,  p.  269. 

(12)  Communist  Manifesto,  p.  30. 


INDEX 


A 


Adam,  Paul,  quoted  concerning 
case  of  Ravachol,  81-82. 

Agents  provocateurs,  work  of,  in 
popular  uprisings  and  socialist 
and  labor  movements,  110-120, 
203-204,  264;  use  of  private  de- 
tectives as,  in  United  States, 
290-292,  312-314. 

Alexander  II  of  Russia,  assassina- 
tion of,  56,  221. 

America.     See  United  States. 

Anarchism,  introduction  of  doc- 
trines of,  in  Western  Europe  by 
Bakounin,  5  ff. ;  secret  societies 
founded  in  interests  of,  11-14; 
insurrections  under  auspices  of, 
28-39;  criticism  of,  by  socialists, 
40;  uprisings  in  Italy  fathered 
by,  41-44;  unbridgeable  chasm 
between  socialism  and,  47-48; 
with  the  Propaganda  of  the 
Deed  becomes  synonymous  with 
violence  and  crime,  55;  foothold 
secured  by,  in  Germany,  55-57; 
in  Austria-Hungary,  57-58;  agi- 
tation in  France,  58-60;  doc- 
trines of,  carried  to  America  by 
Johann  Most,  64-68;  the  Hay- 
market  tragedy,  68-70;  defense 
of,  by  Benjamin  R.  Tucker,  and 
disowning  of  terrorist  tactics 
70-74;  responsibility  for  deeds 
of  leaders  of,  laid  at  Bismarck's 
door,  74-75;  assassination  of 
President  McKinley  and  shoot- 
ing of  H.  C.  Frick,  75;  failure  of, 
to  take  firm  root  in  America  any 
more  than  in  Germany  and 
England,  75-76;  in  the  Latin 
countries,  76;  acts  of  violence  in 


name  of,  in  Europe,  77-89 ;  ques 
tion  of  responsibility  of,  for  acts 
of  violence  committed  by  ter- 
rorists, 90  ff . ;  different  types  at- 
tracted by  socialism  and,  92-93; 
the  psychology  of  devotees  of, 
93-94;  causes  of  terrorist  tactics 
assigned  by  Catholic  Church  to 
doctrines  of  socialism,  98-100; 
source  of,  traceable  to  great-man 
theory,  102  ff. ;  work  of  police 
agents  in  connection  with,  110- 
120;  the  battle  between  social- 
ism and,  154-192;  emergence  of, 
as  a  distinct  philosophy,  193; 
history  of,  after  Hague  congress 
of  1872,  194  ff.;  congress  in  Ge- 
nevain  1873, 196-199;  insolvable 
problem  created  by,  in  rejecting 
political  action  of  the  working 
class,  200;  assaults  on  the  Marx- 
ists by  adherents  of,  201-204; 
bitter  warfare  between  socialism 
and,  201-205;  appearance  of 
syndicalism  as  an  aid  to,  229- 
239;  ignoring  of,  in  socialist  con- 
gresses, 232;  appearance  of  the 
"intellectuals"  in  ranks  of,  239- 
241;  similarities  between  philos- 
ophies and  methods  of  syndical- 
ism and,  239-245;  differences 
between  syndicalism  and,  245- 
246;  consideration  of  the  oldest 
form  of,  that  of  the  wealthy  and 
ruling  classes,  276-326;  of  the* 
powerful  in  the  United  States, 
280  ff. 

Andrieux,     French     revolutionist, 
29. 

Angiolillo,  Italian  terrorist,  87. 

Anti-socialist  law,  Bismarck's,  re- 
sponsible for  Most's  career  as  a. 


375 


376 


INDEX 


terrorist,  74-75 ;  passage  of,  and 
chief  measures  contained  in, 
214-217;  growth  of  socialist  vote 
under,  225 ;  failure  and  repeal  of, 
225-226. 

Arson  practiced  by  revolutionists 
in  America,  73-74. 

Assassination,  preaching  of,  by 
Bakounin  and  Nechayeff,  18; 
practice  of,  by  anarchists  in 
France,  77-89;  the  Catholic 
Church  and,  98-100;  glorifica- 
tion of,  in  history,  101-103. 

Atwell,  B.  A.,  on  character  of  dep- 
uty marshals  in  Chicago  railway 
strike,  300. 

Australia,  parliamentary  power  of 
socialists  in,  329,  330. 

Austria,  Empress  of,  assassinated 
by  Italian  anarchist,  87. 

Austria  -  Hungary,  development 
and  checking  of  anarchist  move- 
ment in,  57-58;  growth  of  so- 
cialist and  labor  vote  in,  328. 


Baker,  Ray  Stannard,  quoted  on 
character  of  deputy  marshals  in 
Chicago  railway  strike,  299-300. 

Bakounin,  Michael,  father  of  ter- 
rorism, 4;  admiration  of,  for 
Satan,  5;  views  held  by,  on  abso- 
lutism, 5-6;  destruction  of  all 
States  and  all  Churches  advo- 
cated by,  6;  varying  opinions  of, 
7;  shown  to  be  human  in  his 
contradictions,  7-8;  chief  char- 
acteristics and  qualities  of  his 
many-sided  nature,  8;  birth, 
family,  and  early  life,  8-9;  leaves 
Russia  for  Germany,  Switzer- 
land, and  France,  9;  meets 
Proudhon,  Marx,  George  Sand, 
and  other  revolutionary  spirits, 
9;  leads  insurrectionary  move- 
ments, 9-10;  captured,  sen- 
tenced to  death,  and  finally 
banished  to  Siberia,  10;  escapes 
and  reaches  England,  10;  change 
in  views  shown  in  writings  of, 


10-11;  spends  some  time  in 
Italy,  11-12;  forms  secret  or- 
ganization of  revolutionists,  11- 
13;  the  International  Brothers, 
the  National  Brothers,  and  the 
International  Alliance  of  Social 
Democracy,  12-14;  enters  the 
International  Working  Men's 
Association,  with  the  hope  of 
securing  leadership,  15;  declares 
war  on  political  and  economic 
powers  of  Europe  and  assails 
Marx,  Engels,  and  other  lead- 
ers, 15-16;  interest  of,  in  Rus- 
sian affairs,  16;  collaborates  with 
Sergei  Nechayeff,  16-17;  ex- 
pounds doctrines  of  criminal  ac- 
tivity, 17-22;  the  "Words  Ad- 
dressed to  Students,"  17-19;  the 
"Revolutionary  Catechism," 
19-22;  quarrel  between  Necha- 
yeff and,  23-26;  remains  in 
Switzerland  and  trains  young 
revolutionists,  26-27 ;  takes  part 
in  unsuccessful  insurrection  at 
Lyons,  28-35;  Marx  quoted 
concerning  action  of,  at  Lyons, 
35-36;  influence  of,  felt  in  Span- 
ish revolution  of  1873,  37-41; 
in  Italy,  during  uprisings  of 
1874,  42-43;  retires  from  public 
life,  45^6;  humiliating  experi- 
ences of  last  years,  46-47;  opin- 
ions expressed  by  anarchists  and 
by  socialists  concerning,  upon 
death  of,  47-48;  teachings  of, 
the  inspiration  of  the  Propa- 
ganda of  the  Deed,  52;  principles 
of,  preached  by  Johann  Most, 
65 ;  spread  of  terrorist  ideas  of,  in 
America,  65;  history  of  the  bat- 
tle between  Marx  and,  154-193 ; 
suspected  and  charged  with 
being  a  Russian  police  agent, 
156,  158;  quoted  on  Marx,  157; 
victory  won  over  Marx  by,  at 
Basel  congress  of  International 
in  1869,  162-169;  attack  of  Marx 
and  his  followers  on,  and  reply 
by,  in  the  "Study  upon  the 
German  Jews,"   169-171;  flood 


INDEX 


377 


of  literature  by,  based  on  his 
antagonism  to  religion  and  to 
Government,  172-174;  inability 
of,  to  comprehend  doctrines  of 
Marxian  socialism,  178-179;  ir- 
reconcilability of  doctrines  of, 
with  those  of  socialists,  179-185; 
expulsion  of,  from  the  Inter- 
national, 191;  attacks  the  Gen- 
eral Council  of  the  International 
as  a  new  incarnation  of  the 
State,  195;  quoted  to  show  an- 
tagonism between  his  doctrines 
and  those  of  Marxists,  251 ;  the 
robber  worship  of,  278-279. 

Barcelona,  bomb-throwing  in,  87. 

Barrot,  Odilon,  348. 

Basel,  congress  of  International  at 
(1869),  162-169. 

Bauer,  Heinrich,  131. 

Bauler,  Madame  A.,  quoted  on 
influence  of  Bakounin,  26-27. 

Bebel,  August,  quoted  on  Bis- 
marck's repressive  measures, 
55-56;  quoted  on  Johann  Most, 
74-75;  on  the  condoning  of  as- 
sassination by  the  Catholic 
Church,  98-99;  reveals  partici- 
pations of  high  officials  in  crimes 
of  the  anarchists,  114-118;  men- 
tioned, 205,  209-210; account  of 
struggle  between  Bismarck  and 
party  of,  211-227;  State-social- 
ist propositions  favored  by,  255- 
256. 

Beesby,  E.  S.,  35;  urges  political 
activity  on  early  trade  unions, 
151. 

Beet,  Thomas,  exposure  by,  of 
evils  attending  use  of  detectives 
in  United  States,  283-284,  290- 
291,  314. 

Berkman,  Alexander,  slioo'ing  of 
H.  C.  Frick  by,  75;  motive 
which  actuated,  101;  events 
which  led  up  to  action  of,  292- 
295;  fate  of,  contrasted  with  that 
of  agents  '>f  the  anarchy  of 
the  wealthy  during  Homestead 
strike,  295. • 


Bern,  revolutionary  manifestation 
at  (1877),  53. 

Berth,  Edward,  quoted  in  connec- 
tion with  the  "intellectuals," 
240-241 ;  mentioned,  270,  353. 

Bismarck,  stirs  up  Germany 
against  social-democratic  party 
on  account  of  anarchistic  acts, 
55;  effect  of  action  of,  on  anar- 
chism in  Germany,  56;  responsi- 
bility of,  for  Johann  Most  and 
other  terrorists,  and  for  Hay- 
market  tragedy,  74-75;  Bebel 
quoted  in  connection  with  the 
hero-worship  of,  in  Germany, 
103-104;  admiration  of,  for 
Lassalle,  206;  corruption  intro- 
duced into  German  labor  move- 
ment by,  210-211;  exposed  by 
Liebknecht  and  Bebel,  begins 
war  upon  Marxian  socialists, 
211-212;  futile  efforts  of,  to 
provoke  social  democrats  to 
violence,  218-219;  reaction  of 
his  violent  measures  upon  him- 
self, 227. 

Blanc,  Gaspard,  29,  31. 

Blanc,  Louis,  128,  129,  353;  Las- 
salle's  views  compared  with 
those  of,  207. 

Blanqui,  socialist  insurrectionist, 
128-129. 

Bonnot,  French  motor  bandit,  88- 
89,  104. 

Booth,  J.  Wilkes,  motive  which 
actuated,  in  killing  of  Lincoln, 
101. 

Brandes,  George,  "Young  Ger- 
many" by,  132;  quoted  on  Las- 
salle, 205-206. 

Brass,  August,  tool  of  Bismarck, 
211. 

Bray,  J.  F.,  130. 

Bresci,  Gaetano,  assassin  of  King 
Humbert,  87. 

Briand,  Aristide,  184  n.,  270,  353. 

Brousse,  Paul,  49,  196-197,  198; 
originates  phrase,  "the  Propa- 
ganda of  the  Deed,"  51-52; 
leads   revolutionary   manifesta- 


3/8 


INDEX 


tion  at  Bern,  53;  leaves  the  Ba- 
kouninists,  204. 

Bucher,  Lothar,  tool  of  Bismarck, 
210. 

Burlington  strike,  outrages  by 
private  detectives  during,  296. 

Burns,  William  J.,  quoted  on  char- 
acter of  detectives  as  a  class, 
284-285. 


Cabet,  Utopian  socialism  of,  144. 

Cafiero,  Carlo,  Italian  revolution- 
ist, disciple  of  Bakounin,  38,  45, 
46,  47,  49,  50,  51,  54. 

Camorra,  an  organization  of  Ital- 
ians which  pursues  terrorist  tac- 
tics, 100. 

"Capital,"  Marx's  work,  152,  344. 

Capitalism,  workingmen's  igno- 
rance concerning,  previous  to 
advent  of  Karl  Marx,  338-341. 

Carnot,  President,  assassination 
of,  85. 

Caserio,  assassin  of  President  Car- 
not, 79,  85-86. 

Castillo,  Canovas  del,  torture  of 
suspected  terrorists  by,  87. 

Catholic  Church,  burden  of  an- 
archism laid  on  doctrines  of  so- 
cialism by,  98;  right  of  assassi- 
nation upheld  by  clergy  of,  98- 
99;  terrorist  tactics  pursued  by 
organizations  of,  100. 

Cerretti,  Celso,  Italian  insurrec- 
tionist, 42. 

Oytrtists,  the,  130,  136,  137,  149. 
Jluseret,  General,  29,  32,  36. 

Colorado,  governmental  tyranny 
during  labor  wars  in,  217;  politi- 
cal and  industrial  battles  in 
(1894-1904),  302-311. 

Commune  of  Paris,  viewed  as  a 
spontaneous  uprising  of  the 
working  class,  36-37. 

Communist  League,  Marx  pre- 
sents his  views  to,  resulting  in 
the  Communist  Manifesto,  137- 
138. 

Communist  Manifesto,  of  Marx 
and  Engels,  137-141 ;  the  univer- 


sal text-book  of  the  socialist 
movement,  334. 

Communist  societies  in  Germanv, 
131. 

Congress  of  United  States,  social- 
ists not  represented  in,  330,  333. 

Congresses,  international,  of  so- 
cialists, 334. 

Cooper,  Thomas,  130. 

Cooperative  movement,  beginning 
of,  in  England,  130;  progress  in 
growth  of,  331-332. 

Corruption,  the  omnipresence  of, 
263-264. 

Costa,  Andrea,  42;  at  anarchist 
congress  in  Geneva  (1873),  197- 
198;  article  by,  attacking  social- 
ists, 201;  leaves  the  Bakoun- 
inists,  204. 

Courts,  prevalence  of  violence  set 
down  to  corruption  of,  107,  108. 

Cramer,  Peter  J.,  union  leader 
killed  by  special  police,  287. 

Criminal  elements,  part  played  by, 
in  uprisings,  109-110;  use  of,  as 
the  tool  of  reactionary  intrigue, 
110  ff.,  281-326. 

Cripple  Creek,  Colo.,  strike,  304- 
306. 

Cyvoct,  militant  anarchist  of 
Lyons,  59-60. 

Czolgosz,  assassin  of  President 
McKinley,  75,  8S;  motive  which 
actuated,  101. 

D 

Debs,  Eugene  V.,  on  instigation  to 
violence  by  deputies  in  Chicago 
railway  strike,  301-302. 

Decamps,  French  terrorist,  79. 

Delesalle,  French  anarchist,  a  spon- 
sor of  sabotage  as  a  war  measure 
of  trade  unionists,  236. 

Democracy,  attacks  of  syndicalism 
on,  264-265;  view  of  the  present 
day  as  the  age  of,  349;  to  be 
achieved  only  through  democ- 
racy, 350,  352;  eternal  faith  of 
socialists  in,  353. 

Detectives,  employment  of,  as 
weapons    of    anarchists    of    the 


INDEX 


379 


wealthy  class  in  the  United 
States,  281  ff. ;  character  of  the 
so-called,  employed  during  big 
strikes  in  United  States,  2S2- 
290;  use  of,  as  instigators  and 
perpetrators  of  acts  of  violence, 
290-292,  299-302,  312-314;  pe- 
cuniary interest  of,  in  provoking 
crime,  314;  intentional  mislead- 
ing of  employers  by,  316-319; 
prolongation  of  strikes  by,  319- 
320;  a  few  of  the  outrages  com- 
mitted by,  320-321. 

Deville,  Gabriel,  202. 

Direct  action,  opposed  by  syn- 
dicalists to  the  political  action 
of  socialists,  267  ff. ;  cannot  be 
revolutionary  action  and  is  des- 
tined to  failure,  272. 

Duehring,  Eugene,  mistaken  views 
of  socialism  held  by,  186. 

Duval,  Clement,  French  anarchist 
and  robber,  77-78. 

Dynamite,  glorifying  of,  by  ter- 
rorists, as  the  poor  man's  wea- 
pon against  capitalism,  69. 


E 


Eccarius,  reply  of,  to  Bakounin  at 
Basel  congress,  178;  at  anarchist 
congress  in  Geneva  (1873),  196. 

Egoistic  conception  of  history, 
carried  to  its  extreme  by  anar- 
chism, 102  ff. 

Engels,  Frederick,  15;  criticism  by, 
of  position  of  Bakouninists  in 
Spanish  revolution,  40,  41;  de- 
scription by,  of  early  communist 
societies  in  Germany,  131;  first 
meeting  of  Marx  and,  and  be- 
ginning of  their  cooperative 
labors,  132-133;  reply  of,  to  Dr. 
Duehring,  186;  socialist  view  of 
the  State  as  expressed  by,  257- 
258;  on  the  lasting  power  exer- 
cised by  Marx  over  the  labor 
movement,  338;  on  the  reor- 
ganization of  society  through 
the  conscious  cooperation  of  the 
masses,  347-348. 


Fenians,  an  organization  of  Irish- 
men which  pursued  terrorist 
tactics,  100. 

Feudal  lords,  anarchism  of  the, 
277-278,  279. 

Fortis,  Italian  revolutionist,  42. 

Fourier,  128;  Utopian  socialism  of, 
144. 

France,  anarchist  activities  in 
(1882),  58-60;  deeds  of  terrorists 
in,  77-86;  effects  of  terrorist 
tactics  in,  86-87;  crimes  of  mo- 
tor bandits  in,  88-89;  early  days 
of  socialism  in,  128-129;  launch- 
ing of  socialist  labor  party  in 
(1878),  202-203;  individualism 
in,  one  cause  for  rise  of  syn- 
dicalism, 242-243;  poverty  as  a 
cause  for  reliance  upon  violence 
of  trade  unions  in,  244. 

Frick,  Henry  C.,  shooting. of,  75; 
events  which  led  up  to  shooting 
of,  292-295. 

Fruneau,  quoted  on  corruption  in 
revolutions,  263. 


G 


General  Confederation  of  Labor, 
organization  of,  233. 

General  strike,  inauguration  of 
idea,  by  French  trade  unionists, 

-  233-234;  Guerard's  argument 
for,  234-235;  notable  points  in 
program  of  action  of,  235-236; 
program  of  trade  unionists  in 
case  of  success  in,  237-238;  con- 
ditions which  produce  agitation 
for,  243-244;  doubts  of  syn- 
dicalists as  to  success  of  a  peace- 
able strike,  246-247;  Jaurfes' 
warning  against  the,  270;  ridi- 
cule of,  by  Marx  and  Engels, 
343. 

Geneva,  congress  of  anarchists  at, 
in  1873,  196-199. 

Germany,  beginning  of  anarchist 
activity  in,  55-57;  great  polit- 
ical   organization    built    up    by 


38o 


INDEX 


socialists  in,  203 ;  meteoric  career 
of  Lassalle  in,  205-209;  history 
of  Bismarck's  losing  battle  with 
social  democracy  in,  211-227; 
State  ownership  favored  by  so- 
cialists in,  254-256;  growth  of 
socialist  and  labor  vote  in,  328; 
strong  parliamentary  position  of 
socialists  in,  329-330. 

Goldman,  Emma,  quoted  on  Jo- 
hann  Most,  67;  quoted  on  causes 
of  violent  acts  by  terrorists,  91 ; 
on  the  connection  of  police  with 
anarchist  outrages,  119. 

Grave,  Jean,  French  anarchist,  81. 

Gray,  John,  130. 

Great-man  theory,  terrorist  deeds 
of  violence  traceable  to,  102  ff. 

Guerard,  argument  of,  for  revo- 
lutionary general  strike,  234— 
235. 

Guesde,  Jules,  202,  204;  quoted  on 
direct  action  vs.  political  action, 
267-269. 

Guillaume,  James,  Swiss  revolu- 
tionist, friend  of  Bakounin,  28, 
38,  42,  45,  47,  53,  197,  199,  229; 
takes  part  in  manifestation  at 
Bern  (1877),  53. 

H 

Hales,  John,  at  anarchist  congress 
in  Geneva  (1873),  196-199. 

Hall,  Charles,  130. 

Harney,  George  Julian,  137. 

Harrison,  Frederic,  quoted,  151. 

Hasselmann,  German  revolution- 
ist, 56,  65;  ejection  of,  from  so- 
cialist party,  220. 

Haymarket  catastrophe,  Chicago, 
68-70. 

Henry,  Ernile,  French  terrorist, 
79,  84-85,  104. 

Herwegh,  German  poet  and  revo- 
lutionist, 157-158. 

Hess,  Moritz,  secret  history  of 
Basel  congress  of  1869  by,  169- 
170. 

Hillquit,  Morris,  description  by,  of 
battle  between  strikers  and  de- 
tectives at  Homestead,  293-294. 


|  Hins,  follower  of  Bakounin,  quoted, 
163;  outlines,  in  1869,  program 
of  modern  syndicalists,  166-167. 

Hodel,  assassin  of  Emperor  Wil- 
liam. 55,  213. 

Hodgskin,  Thomas,  130. 

Hogan,  "Kid,"  quoted  on  strike- 
breakers, 288-289. 

Homestead  strike,  character  of 
Pinkertons  employed  in,  285- 
286;  account  of  battle  between 
strikers  and  special  police,  292- 
294. 

Houses  of  the  People,  in  Europe, 
332. 

Humbert,  King,  attempt  upon  life 
of,  55;  assassination  of,  87. 

Hume,  Joseph,  130. 


Individualism  in  France  a  contrib- 
uting cause  to  rise  of  syndical- 
ism, 242-243. 

Industrial  Workers  of  the  World, 
American  syndicalism,  247  n. 

Inheritance,  abolition  of  right  of, 
advocated  by  Bakounin,  163- 
164. 

Intellectuals,  appearance  of,  as  an 
aid  to  anarchism,  239-241;  lack 
of  real  understanding  of  labor 
movement  by,  and  fate  of,  354. 

International  Alliance  of  Social 
Democracy,  12-14. 

International  Brothers,  12—14. 

International  Working  Men's  As- 
sociation (the  "International"), 
Bakounin's  attempt  to  inject  his 
ideas  into,  7,  15;  launching  of 
the,  145-146;  beginning  made 
by,  in  actual  political  work,  150- 
152;  struggles  in,  between  fol- 
lowers of  Marx  and  followers  of 
Bakounin's  anarchist  doctrines, 
154  ff. ;  congress  of,  at  Basel  in 
1869  the  turning-point  in  its  his- 
tory, 162-168;  overturning  of 
foundation  principles  of,  owing 
to  anarchist  tendencies  of  the 
congress,  168;  period  of  slight 
accomplishment,   from   1869  to 


INDEX 


38l 


1873,  189-190;  congress  of  1873 
at  The  Hague,  191 ;  expulsion  of 
Bakounin  and  removal  of  seat 
of  General  Council  to  New  York, 
191-192;  motives  of  Marx  in 
destroying,  192;  one  chief  result 
of  existence  of,  the  distinct  sep- 
aration of  anarchism  and  social- 
ism, 192-193;  attempts  of  Ba- 
kouninists  to  revive,  after  Hague 
congress,  196  ff. ;  end  of  efforts 
of  anarchists  to  build  a  new,  200. 

International  Working  People's 
Association,  anarchist  society  in 
America,  68,  73. 

Italy,    anarchist   uprisings   in,    in 

1874,  41-44;  demonstration  un- 
der doctrines  of  Propaganda  of 
the  Deed  in  (1877),  53-54;  rea- 
sons for  individual  execution  of 
justice  in,  found  in  expense  of 
official  justice  and  corruptness  of 
courts,  108;  conditions  in,  lead- 
ing to  rise  of  syndicalism,  242, 
243;  socialist  and  labor  vote  in, 
328;  parliamentary  strength  of 
socialists  in,  330. 

Iwanoff,  Russian  revolutionist, 
22-23. 


Jaclard,  Victor,  14,  29. 

Jaures,  tribute  paid  to  Marx  by, 
152-153;  warning  pronounced 
by,  against  the  general  strike, 
270. 

Jesuits  and  doctrine  of  assassina- 
tion, 98-99. 

Jones,  Ernest,  130. 


K 


Kammerer,  anarchist  in  Austria- 
Hungary,  57,  58. 

Kampffmeyer,  Paul,  quoted  on 
State-socialist  propositions  in 
Germany,  255. 

Kautsky,  Karl,  on  the  Statism  of 
the  socialist  party,  256. 

Kropotkin,  Prince,  49-50;  enthu- 
siasm of,  over  the  Propaganda  of 


the  Deed,  52;  quoted  on  anar- 
chist activities  at  Lyons,  59; 
on  act  of  United  States  Supreme 
Court  declaring  unconstitutional 
the  eight-hour  law  on  Govern- 
ment work,  62-63;  quoted  on 
the  Pittsburgh  strike,  63-64;  on 
treatment  of  anarchists  by  so- 
cialists, 92  n. ;  quoted  on  Russian 
secret  police  system,  113  n.:  ar- 
ticles by,  attacking  socialist 
parliamentary  tactics,  201-202; 
on  the  necessity  of  parliamen- 
tary action  in  distribution  of 
land  after  the  French  Revolu- 
tion, 272. 


Labor  movement,  violence  char- 
acteristic of  early  years  of  the, 
125-126;  beginning  of  real  build- 
ing of,  in  the  middle  of  the  last 
century,  127;  profit  to,  from  aid 
of  "intellectual"  circles,  127;  in 
France,  128-129;  in  England, 
129-131;  setback  to,  in  England 
due  to  various  causes,  131;  be- 
ginnings of,  in  Germany,  131— 
134;  beginning  of  work  of  Marx 
and  Engels  in  connection  with, 
132  ff.;  attempt  of  early  socialist 
and  anarchist  sects  to  inject 
their  ideas  into,  145;  launching 
of  the  International,  145  ff. :  en- 
trance of  the  International  into 
actual  political  work,  150-152; 
the  ideal  of  the  labor  movement 
as  expressed  by  Lincoln,  152; 
part  played  by  the  International 
as  an  organization  of  labor,  192; 
origins  of,  in  Germany,  209; 
Bismarck's  persecution  of  social 
democrats  in  Germany,  211- 
227;  entrance  of  anarchism  into, 
in  France,  231  ff. ;  illegitimate 
activities  of  capital  against,  in 
United  States,  280-326;  proce'ss 
of  building  structure  of  the 
present,  335-337;  position  as  a 
great    and    material    actuality, 


-• 


INDEX 


3:17;  tracing  of  work  done  by 
Marx  in  connection  with,  338  ff . ; 
progress  of,  as  indicated  by  so- 
cialist and  labor  vote,  328-329; 
parliamentary  strength  of,  329- 
331;  growth  of  cooperations  and 
trade  unions,  331-333. 

Labor  Standard  article  on  United 
States  Supreme  Court  decision, 
62-63. 

Labor  Temples  in  Europe,  332. 

Labriola,  Arturo,  syndicalist  crit- 
icism of  socialism  by,  249-251; 
views  of,  on  Parliamentarism, 
261. 

Lafargue,  Paul,  202. 

Lagardelle,  on  the  antagonism  of 
syndicalism  and  democracy, 
264-265. 

Lankiewicz,  Valence,  28. 

Lassalle,  German  socialist  agita- 
tor, 205  ff. ;  by  organizing  the 
Universal  German  Working 
Men's  Association,  becomes 
founder  of  German  labor  move- 
ment, 209;  relations  between 
Bismarck  and,  210. 

Legien,  Carl,  quoted  on  French 
labor  movement,  243. 

Le  Vin,  detective,  quoted  on  char- 
acter of  special  police,  286. 

Lrvme,  Louis,  "The  Labor  Move- 
ment in  France"  by,  quoted, 
244. 

Liebknecht,  Wilhelm,  quoted  on 
Marx's  opposition  to  insurrec- 
tion led  by  Herwegh,  158;  men- 
tioned, 205,  209-210;  efforts  of 
Bismarck  to  corrupt,  211;  per- 
secution of,  by  Bismarck,  211- 
212;  frank  statement  of  repub- 
lican principles  by,  212-213; 
quoted  on  defeat  of  Bismarck  by 
socialists,  226;  quoted  as  in 
favor  of  State-socialist  proposi- 
tions in  Germany,  256. 

Lincoln,  Abraham,  ideal  of  the 
labor  movement  as  expressed  by, 
1  r,2. 

:,   Louis,   Chicago  anarchist, 
70,  95. 


Lombroso,  on  corrective  measures 
to  be  used  with  anarchists,  96- 
97;  on  the  complicity  of  crimi- 
nality and  politics,  109. 

Lovett,  William,  130. 

Luccheni,  Italian  assassin,  87. 

Lynchings,  an  explanation  given 
for,  107,  108. 

Lyons,  unsuccessful  insurrection 
at,  in  1870,  28-35. 

M 

McDowell,  Malcomb,  on  character 
of  deputy  marshals  in  Chicago 
railway  strike,  300-301. 

McKinley,  President,  assassina- 
tion of,  75,  88. 

McNamaras,  the,  318,  324. 

Mafia,  the,  an  organization  of 
Italians  which  pursues  terror- 
ist tactics,  100. 

Malatesta,  Enrico,  Italian  revo- 
lutionist, 43-44,  49,  51. 

Manufacturers'  Association,  law- 
less work  of  the,  318. 

Mariana,  Jesuit  who  upheld  as- 
sassination of  tyrants,  98,  99. 

Marx,  Karl,  view  of  Bakounin 
held  by,  7 ;  meeting  of  Bakounin 
and,  9;  assailed  by  Bakounin 
upon  latter's  entrance  into  the 
International,  15-16;  quoted  on 
the  insurrection  at  Lyons  in 
1870,  35-36;  on  Bakounin's 
"abolition  of  the  State,"  36;  on 
the  Commune  of  Paris,  37;  edu- 
cation and  early  career  of,  132- 
134;  the  Communist  Manifesto, 
137-141 ;  resignation  of,  from 
central  council  of  Communist 
League,  141-142;  gives  evidence 
of  perception  of  lack  of  revolu- 
tionary promise  in  sectarian  or- 
ganizations, secret  societies,  and 
political  conspiracies,  142;  gi- 
gantic intellectual  labors  of,  in 
laying  foundations  of  a  scientific 
socialism,  143;  the  Interna- 
tional launched  by,  145-146; es- 
sence  of  socialism   of,   in   Pre- 


INDEX 


33 


amble  of  the  Provisional  Rules 
of  the  International,  147-148; 
statement  of  idea  of,  as  to  revo- 
lutionary character  of  political 
activity,  149-150;  immense  work 
of,  in  connection  with  the  Inter- 
national, and  publishing  of 
"Capital"  by,  152;  summing  up 
of  services  of,  by  Jaures,  152- 
153;  the  battle  between  Bakou- 
nin  and,  154  ff. ;  annoyance  and 
humiliation  of,  by  victory  of 
Bakouninists  at  Basel  congress, 
168-169;  bitter  attack  made  on 
Bakounin  and  his  circle  by,  169- 
170;  motives  of,  in  destroying 
the  International  by  moving 
seat  of  General  Council  to  New 
York,  191-192;  Bismarck's  at- 
tempt to  corrupt,  210;  view  held 
by,  of  the  State  and  its  func- 
tions, 257;  quoted  on  "parlia- 
mentary cretinism,"  261-262; 
battles  of  workingmen  fought  on 
lines  laid  down  by,  338;  im- 
mensity of  task  actually  exe- 
cuted by,  344-356. 

Merlino,  Italian  anarchist,  81. 

Michel,  Louise,  French  anarchist, 
60. 

Milwaukee,  character  of  special 
police  employed  during  molders' 
strike  in,  286-287. 

Mine  Owners'  Association,  anar- 
chism of,  in  Colorado,  304-311. 

Moll,  Joseph,  132,  137. 

Molly  Maguircs,  an  organization 
of  Irishmen  which  pursued  ter- 
rorist tactics,  100. 

Most,  Johann,  a  product  of  Bis- 
marck's man-hunting  policy  and 
legal  tyranny,  56 ;  the  Freiheit  of, 
57,  65;  brings  terrorist  ideas  of 
Bakounin  and  Nechayeff  to 
America,  64-65 ;  early  history  of, 
65-66;  Emma  Goldman's  de- 
scription of,  67;  effect  of  agita- 
tion and  doctrines  of,  on  social- 
ism in  America,  67-68;  climax  of 
theories  of,  reached  in  the  Hay- 
market  tragedy,  Chicago,  68-70; 


article  on  "Revolutionary  Prin- 
ciples" by,  69-70;  history  of 
terrorist  tactics  in  America  cen- 
ters about  career  of,  74;  respon- 
sibility of  anti-socialist  laws  for 
misguided  efforts  and  final 
downfall  of,  74-75;  ejected  from 
socialist  party  for  advocating 
violence  in  war  with  Bismarck, 
219-220. 

Motor  bandits,  career  of,  in 
France,  88-89. 

Museux,  quoted  on  Ravachol,  82. 

"Muzzle  Bill,"  Bismarck's,  221. 


N 


National  Brothers,  the,    12-14. 

Nechayeff,  Sergei,  young  Russian 
revolutionist,  16;  collaboration 
of,  with  Bakounin,  16  ff. ;  ques- 
tion of  share  of  "Words  Ad- 
dressed to  Students"  and  "The 
Revolutionary  Catechism"  to 
be  attributed  to,  22;  activities 
of,  in  Russia,  22-23;  murder  of 
Iwanoff  by,  23;  quarrels  with 
Bakounin,  steals  his  papers,  and 
flees  to  London,  23;  subsequent 
career  and  death,  25-26. 

Nobiling,  Dr.  Karl,  55,  214. 

O 

O'Brien,  J.  B.,  130. 

O'Connor,  Feargus,  130,  353. 

Orchard,  Harry,  crimes  of,  paid 
for  by  detective  agencies,  307- 
310. 

Owen,  Robert,  130;  Utopian  social- 
ism of,  144;  in  the  Webbs' 
critique  of,  the  economic  falla- 
cies of  syndicalism  are  revealed, 
260-261. 

Ozerof,  revolutionary  enthusiast, 
friend  of  Bakounin,  28,  30,  34. 


Paris,  anarchist  movement  in 
(1883),  60;  acts  of  violence  in, 
77-89. 


>84 


INDEX 


Parliamentarism,  criticism  of,  by 
syndicalists,  249,  261;  attitude 
of  socialism  toward,  262-263. 

Parliamentary  strength  of  social- 
ism at  present  day,  329-331. 

Pelloutier,  leader  in  French  labor 
movement,  231. 

Peukert,  anarchist  in  Austria- 
Hungary,  57,  58;  found  to  be  a 
police  spy,  113-114. 

Pinkerton  detectives,  the  tools  of 
anarchists  of  the  capitalist  class 
in  the  United  States,  281  ff. 

Place,  Francis,  130. 

Plechanoff,  George,  53;  quoted, 
200;  breaks  with  the  Bakounin- 
ists,  204. 

Pirn,  French  anarchist  and  robber, 
96. 

Police  agents,  work  of,  against  an- 
archism, socialism,  and  trade- 
union  novements,  110-120,  203- 
204;  infamous  roles  played  by, 
in  United  States,  290-292,  299- 
302,  312-314;  list  of  notable, 
who  have  played  a  double  part 
in  labor  movements,  313. 

Policing  by  the  State,  a  check 
on  anarchism  of  individuals, 
279. 

Political  action,  dependence  of 
Marx's  program  on,  137-141; 
fight  of  anarchists  against,  232; 
criticism  of,  by  syndicalists, 
249  ff . ;  direct  action  placed  over 
against,  by  the  syndicalists, 
267  ff. 

Pougatchoff ,  Bakounin's  idealizing 
of,  278. 

Pouget,  Emil,  French  anarchist, 
60;  origin  of  modern  syndical- 
ism with,  231;  sabotage  intro- 
duced by,  at  trade-union  con- 
gress in  Toulouse,  235;  attack 
of  syndicalism  on  democracy 
voiced  by,  264;  on  the  syndical- 
ist's contempt  for  democracy, 
265. 

Poverty,  as  a  cause  of  reliance 
upon  violence  by  French  trade 
unions,  244. 


Propaganda  of  the  Deed,  origin  of 
the,  49-52;  inspiration  of,  found 
in  the  teachings  of  Bakounin, 
52;  revolutionary  demonstra- 
tions organized  under  doctrines 
of,  52-54 ;  as  the  chief  expression 
of  anarchism,  makes  the  name 
anarchism  synonymous  with  vio- 
lence and  crime,  55;  progress  of, 
as  shown  by  anarchist  activities 
in  Germany,  Austria-Hungary, 
and  France,  55-60;  influence  of, 
in  Italy,  Spain,  and  Belgium, 
60-61;  bringing  of,  to  America 
by  Johann  Most,  62-76.  See 
Terrorism. 

Proudhon,  acquaintance  between 
Bakounin  and,  9;  the  father  of 
anarchism,   ]29. 

Proudhonian  anarchists,  inability 
of,  to  comprehend  socialism  of 
Marx,  148-149. 

Pryor,  Judge  Roger  A.,  condem- 
nation by,  of  use  of  private  de- 
tectives by  corporations,  297- 
298. 

Pullman  strike,  employment  and 
character  of  private  detectives 
in,  298-302. 

R 

Ravachol,  French  terrorist,  79-82, 
104. 

Razin,  Stenka,  leader  cf  Russian 
peasant  insurrection,  17;  Ba- 
kounin's robber  worship  of,  278. 

Reclus,  Elisee,  14;  quoted  con- 
cerning Ravachol,  81. 

Red  Flag,  Hasselmann's  paper,  56. 

Reinsdorf,  August,  assassin  of 
German  Emperor,  69-70. 

"Revolutionary  Catechism,"  by 
Bakounin  and  Nechayeff,  19-22. 

Rey,  Aristide,  14. 

Richard,  Albert,  29,  32. 

Rittinghausen,  delegate  to  con- 
gress of  the  International,  quot- 
ed, 162-163;  on  the  futility  of 
insurrection  as  a  policy,  272. 

Robber-worship,  Bakounin's,  17, 
278. 


INDEX 


385 


Rochdale  Pioneers,  the,  130. 
Rochefort,  Henri,  remarks  of,  on 

anarchists,  70-71. 
Rubin,    W.    B.,    investigation    of 

character  of  special  police  by, 

286-287. 
Rull,  Juan,  Spanish  gang  leader, 

119. 


S 


Sabotage,  danger  of  use  of,  in 
United  States,  324-325;  appear- 
ance of,  and  explanation,  236; 
as  really  another  name  for  the 
Propaganda  of  the  Deed,  247. 

Saffi,  Italian  revolutionist,  42. 

Saignes,  Eugene,  30,  31. 

Saint-Simon,  128. 

Salmons,  C.  H.,  on  outrages  by 
private  detectives  during  Bur- 
lington strike,  296. 

Sand,  George,  9,  158. 

Schapper,  Karl,  131,  141. 

Secret  societies  organized  by  Ba- 
kounin,  11-14. 

Shelley,  P.  B.,  psychology  of  the 
anarchists  depicted  by,  93. 

Small,  Albion  W.,  estimate  of 
Marx  by,  143. 

Socialism,  early  use  of  word,  34  n. ; 
split  between  anarchism  and,  in 
1869,  47-48,  162-169;  rapid 
spread  of,  in  America  after  panic 
of  1873,  64-65;  disastrous  effect 
on,  of  Most's  agitation  in  Amer- 
ica, 67-68;  contrasted  with  an- 
archism on  the  point  of  the 
latter's  inspiring  deeds  of  vio- 
lence by  terrorists,  90-92;  dif- 
ferent types  attracted  by  anar- 
chism and,  92-93;  burden  of 
anarchism  placed  on,  by  Cath- 
olic clergy,  98;  growth  of,  125  ff., 
202-203;  early  days  of,  in 
France,  128-129;  in  England, 
129-131;  in  Germany,  131-134; 
Communist  Manifesto  of  Marx 
and  Engels  a  part  of  the  basic 
literature  of,  138;  the  Utopian, 
destroyed   by   Marx's  scientific 


theory,    144-145;   the   blending 
of  labor  and,  a  matter  of  dec- 
ades,   145;    essence    of    Marx's, 
found  in   the  Preamble  of  the 
Provisional  Rules  of  the  Inter- 
national, 147-148;  routing  of,  by 
anarchist  doctrines  in  congress 
of    International    at    Basel    in 
1869,  162-169;  inquiry  into  and 
exposition   of   the   aims  of  the 
Marxian,    174-178;  attacks  on, 
by  anarchists  after  Hague  con- 
gress of  1872,  201  ff.;  fruitless 
war   waged    on    German   social 
democracy  by  Bismarck,   211— 
227;  defeat  and  humiliation  of 
Bismarck  by,  225-227;  strength 
of,  throughout  Europe  shown  in 
elections  of  1892,  227-228;  dif- 
ference between  aims  and  meth- 
ods of,  and  those  of  syndicalism, 
238-239 ;    antagonism    between 
syndicalism   and,   247  ff.;   266; 
Statism    of,    criticised    by    syn- 
dicalists, 249-251,  252;  real  po- 
sition of,  regarding  State  owner- 
ship and  State  capitalism,  252- 
258;  criticism  of,  by  syndicalists 
on  grounds  of  Parliamentarism, 
261;    real    attitude    of,    toward 
control  of  parliaments,  262-263 ; 
battle  of,  is  against  both  the  old 
anarchists,   and   the  new  anar- 
chists of   the  wealthy   class  in 
the  United  States,  325-326;  sta- 
tistics  of   increase   in   vote   of, 
328-329 ;  parliamentary  strength 
of,    329-331;    conditions   which 
retard    progress    of,    in    United 
States.    332-333;    tendency    of 
labor  movement  in  all  lands  to- 
ward, 333-334 ;  international  con- 
gresses of  party,  334;  results  of 
inseparableness    of    democracy 
and,  353-354;  slow  but  sure  and 
steady  progress  of,  355-356. 

Sombart,  Werner,  quoted  on  syn- 
dicalism and  the  "social  syba- 
rites," 241;  quoted  on  tendency 
of  labor  movement  in  all  lands 
toward  socialism,  333. 


386 


INDEX 


Sorel,  quoted  to  show  hostility  of 
syndicalism  to  democracy,  264. 

Spain,  revolution  of  1873  in,  37- 
41;  repression  of  terrorist  tac- 
tics in,  87. 

Spies,  August,  "revenge  circular" 
of,  68. 

State,  check  placed  on  anarchism 
of  the  individual  by  the,  279- 
280;  activity  of,  in  opposition  to 
labor  in  United  States,  322-324. 

Statism,  criticism  of,  of  the  social- 
ist party,  by  syndicalists,  249- 
252;  statement  of  attitude 
of  socialism  toward,  252-258; 
economic  fallacies  of  syndicalists 
regarding,  pointed  out  by  the 
Webbs  on  their  critique  of 
Owen's  trade-union  socialism, 
260-261. 

Steinert,  Henry,  quoted  on  special 
police  and  detectives,  285. 

Stellmacher,  anarchist  in  Austria- 
Hungary,  57,  58. 

Stephens,  Joseph  Rayner,  130, 
353. 

Stirner,  Max,  "The  Ego  and  His 
Own"  by,  quoted,   105. 

"Study  upon  the  German  Jews," 
Bakounin's,  170-171. 

Supreme  Court  of  United  States, 
act  of,  declaring  unconstitu- 
tional the  eight-hour  iaw  on 
Government  work,  62-63. 

Syndicalism,  program  of,  outlined 
at  congress  of  International  in 
1869,  166-167;  forecast  of,  con- 
tained in  Bakounin's  arguments, 
185;  revival  in  1895  of  anar- 
chism under  name  of,  229;  ex- 
planation of,  and  reason  for 
existence,  230  ff. ;  wherein  aim 
and  methods  differ  from  those  of 
socialism,  238-239;  connection 
of  the  "intellectuals"  with,  239- 
241;  reasons  found  for,  in  cer- 
tain French  and  Italian  condi- 
tions, 242-245;  essential  differ- 
ences between  anarchism  and, 
245-246;  necessary  antagonism 
between  socialism  and,  247  ff.; 


objections  to  the  outline  of  a 
new  society  contemplated  by, 
259  ff. ;  criticism  of  Parliamen- 
tarism of  socialism  by,  261;  at- 
tacks of,  on  democracy,  264- 
265;  antagonism  of  socialism 
and,  in  aim  and  methods,  266  fit; 
proven  to  be  the  logical  de- 
scendant of  anarchism,  270-271 ; 
its  fate  to  be  the  same  as  that  of 
anarchism,  271-272;  claim  of, 
that  revolutionary  movement 
must  pursue  economic  aims  and 
disregard  political  relations,  273. 


Tennyson,  quotation  from,  96. 

Terrorism,  doctrine  of,  brought 
into  Western  Europe  by  Ba- 
kounin,  4,  9-10,  17  ff.;  set  forth 
in  "Revolutionary  Catechism" 
by  Bakounin  and  Nechayeff, 
19-22;  practical  introduction  of, 
in  insurrections  of  the  early 
seventies,  28  ff.,  41-44;  criticism 
of,  by  socialists,  40;  advent  of 
the  Propaganda  of  the  Deed, 
and  resultant  acts  of  violence  in 
Italy,  50-55;  carried  into  Ger- 
many, Austria-Hungary,  and 
France,  56-60;  doctrine  of, 
spread  in  America  by  Johann 
Most,  65-68;  protest  voiced  by 
Tucker,  American  anarchist, 
against  terrorist  tactics,  70-74; 
failure  of,  to  take  deep  root  in 
America,  75-76;  acts  of,  com- 
mitted by  anarchists  in  France, 
77-89;  causes  of,  90  ff.;  due  to 
hysteria  and  pseudo-insanity, 
93-94;  wrong  attitude  of  society 
as  to  corrective  measures,  94- 
98;  burden  of,  placed  by  Cath- 
olics on  socialism,  98-101;  glori- 
fication of,  in  annals  of  history, 
101;  egoistic  conception  of  his- 
tory carried  to  an  extreme  in, 
102-106;  caused  by  corruption 
of  courts  and  oppressive  laws, 
107-108;    complicity    of    crimi- 


INDEX 


387 


nality  and,  109;  use  of,  by  Euro- 
pean governments,  110-120, 
219  ff.;  introduced  into  the 
International  by  Bakouuin,  and 
struggles  of  Marxists  against, 
154-193;  part  played  by,  in 
Bismarck's  war  on  social  democ- 
racy, 213,  217,  218;  attempts  of 
Bismarck  to  provoke,  219  ff. ; 
reaction  of,  on  Bismarck,  227; 
employed  by  ruling  class  in 
America,  by  means  of  private 
detectives  and  special  police, 
276-324. 

Thompson,  William,  130. 

Tolstoi,  Berth's  characterization 
of,  241. 

Tortellier,  French  agitator  and 
anarchist,  231;  declaration  of, 
against  political  action,  232. 

Trade  unions,  at  basis  of  Spanish 
revolution  of  1873,  39;  entrance 
into,  of  anarchism,  resulting  in 
syndicalism,  231  ff.  See  Labor 
movement. 

Tucker,  Benjamin  R.,  New  York 
anarchist,     quoted     on    "The 
Beast  of  Communism,"  70-74. 


U 


United  States,  unsettled  conditions 
in,  after  panic  of  1873,  62-64; 
development  of  socialist  and 
trade-union  organizations  in, 
64;  Bakounin's  terrorist  ideas 
brought  to,  by  Johann  Most, 
65;  acts  of  violence  in,  67-70; 
protests  of  anarchists  of,  against 
terrorism,  70-74 ;  failure  of  anar- 
chism to  take  firm  root  in,  75; 
anarchism  of  the  powerful  in, 
280  ff.;  system  of  extra-legal 
police  agents  in,  281-291,  311  ff.; 
account  of  tragic  episodes  in 
history  of  labor  disputes  in,  291- 
311;  abetting  by  the  State  of 
mercenary  anarchists  in,  322- 
325;  figures  of  socialist  and  labor 


vote  in,  328;  socialists  of,  wholly 
lacking  in  representation  in  Con- 
gress, 330,  333;  conditions  in, 
calculated  to  retard  progress  of 
socialist  and  labor  movement, 
332-333. 

Universal  German  Working  Men's 
Association,  organization  of, 
209. 

Utopian  socialism  destroyed  by 
Marx's  scientific  socialism,  144. 


Vaillant,  August,  French  terrorist, 

79,  82-84,  104. 
Valzania,  Italian  revolutionist,  42. 

Vincenzo,  Tomburri,  Italian  revo- 
lutionist, 54. 

Violence,  analysis  of  causes  of,  90- 
122.    See  Terrorism. 

Vliegen,  Dutch  labor  leader,  on  the 
general  strike,  243-244. 

Von  Schweitzer,  leader  in  German 
labor  movement,  reported  to 
have  sold  out  to  Bismarck,  211. 

Vote  of  socialists  and  laborites 
(1887-1913),  328,  329. 

W 

Webb,  Sidney  and  Beatrice,  eco- 
nomic fallacies  of  syndicalism 
indicated  by,  260-261. 

Weitling,  early  German  socialist 
agitator,   132. 

Western  Federation  of  Miners, 
crimes  falsely  attributed  to, 
307-310. 

West  Virginia,  governmental  tyr- 
anny during  labor  troubles  in, 
217;  outrages  committed  by 
special  police  in,  292. 

Wickersham,  George  W.,  testi- 
mony of,  as  to  packing  of  a  jury 
by  private  detectives,  289. 

William  I.,  Emperor,  attempts  on 
life  of,  55,  213-214. 


388 


INDEX 


"Words  Addressed  to  Students," 
Bakounin  and  Nechayeff's,  17. 

Wyden,  secret  conference  of  Ger- 
man social  democrats  at,  219- 
220. 


Yvetot,  quoted  on  syndicalism  and 
anarchism,  245. 


Zenker,  quoted  on  anarchist  move- 
ment in  Austria-Hungary,  57- 
58;  on  association  formed  by 
Most  for  uniting  revolutionists, 
66;  on  motives  behind  deeds  of 
violence,  100. 

Zola,  psychology  of  the  anarchist 
depicted  by,  93. 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 

Los  Angeles 
This  book  is  DUE  on  the  last  date  stamped  below. 


ffxrs 


« 


8 


m\ 


■*  • 


ate  1**2 

pr  JUN  1 2  1978 


m  L9-Series  444 


'79 


3   1158  00318   1806 


|     T&> 


UC  SOUTHERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FACILITY 


AA    000  398  746 


